Well, knock me down with a feather. There is a quotation here, with reference. Instantly, I can find no modern reference to John Jacob Brooke Morgan, but old copies of his work are available. This particular work was published between 1928 and 1944, although some listing have an edition claimed to be published in 1953 by Longmans, Green. From the posthumous publication listings, I can gather than Mr Brooke passed away between 1944 and 1945. It is difficult for me to establish the value that modern society places on this particular work of Mr Morgan, but I seem to be able to obtain used copies for reasonable prices, so we'll see what this chapter has to say first.
My joy at finding an external reference is short lived once I understand that the quote, "Psychology has ... no mental standards to set up ... The psychologist does not occupy himself with the establishment of norms." is used here to illustrate that psychology has no norms by which to work. The interpretation of this depends on your view point.
If you expect that each individual is treated on their own merits and is approached without preconception, then Morgan's words hold strength. If you expect that there is a scientific basis to the human personality then the quote will disappoint. The quote therefore needs to be put further in to context; it is not enough on its own to support or detract from anything.
So. Back to the chapter.
The long story short on the first page is an expansion of the above. That the field of psychiatry has been complaining that categorisation does not lead to cure, because categorisation is impossible.
With classic medicine, if someone has broken their arm it does not matter too much that they fell off a chair or tripped over a step. You treat the broken arm.
With mental issues such as depression, the individual could be depressed because of the death of a relative or the loss of a job; in these cases the causes must be treated. Berievement for the death of the relative or empowering the person in the search for employment. Should these prove effective then the depression should go of its own accord. Even though drugs can be used in the short term to alleviate the symptoms of the depression, without addressing the cause there will be no permanent relief.
So. Point well made. In fact, psychiatry and dianetics actually agree in this avenue.
Then, however, this chapter splits. It starts by making sense, "If he is sure he has to buy everything he sees, despite his income, he has an engram which tells him to buy everything he sees." and other understandable situations along the same compulsive obsessive line, but then ruins this good, solid train by continuing, "The man who 'cannot be sure', who 'does not know' and who is sceptical of everything is talking out of engrams. The man who is certain 'it cannot be true' that 'it isn't possible' that 'authority must be contacted' is talking out of engrams. The woman who is so certain that she needs a divorce or that her husband is going to murder her some night is talking out of either her own or his engrams." This is downright dangerous. What is being discussed here is paying no heed to logical conclusion and is laying some very serious situations at the door of having engrams. Such claims do not make sense, and my concerns on this are not alleviated elsewhere in the chapter. Hubbard appears to have really meant this when he wrote it.
In order for these latter people to actually be diagnosed as being suffering from these conditions internally, then there must first be an investigation in to the substance of these fears; they can not be dismissed as psychosomatic out of hand or by automatic conclusion.
The rest of the chapter goes on for a number of pages and I, personally, draw a number of parallels between this and modern counselling as I have experienced it.
The chapter finale at the end is another show of the works age; citing the horrors of early treatments such as pre-frontal lobotomy, transorbital leukotomy and electric shock treatment, abandoned by psychiatry for some decades. I still recall walking in to psychiatric buildings which bore the echoes of such shock cables, gone from practice but not from memory.
Psychiatry has moved on from the nineteen fifties.
Beyond the above, the chapter on diagnosis requires the individual to read it for themselves as it attempts to classify the conversation had between the auditor and the patient. As such it serves no further definition to dianetics as a working science.
The Auditor's Role
This chapter is a guide for confirming the role of an auditor as being the guide that shares the persons ills and is there with them for the journey. It details the qualities that an auditor should bring to their task in the application of dianetics and, as such, contains very little that further defines dianetics itself.
For the reason I gave before, that it is possible a guilt complex can make a situation worse rather than better, I am concerned by one of the last paragraphs in this section, "If an auditor assumes the state of mind that he can sit and whistle while Rome burns before him and be prepared to grin about it, then he will do an optimum job. The things at which he gazes, no matter how they look, no matter how they sound, are solid gains. It's the quiet, orderly patient who is making few gains."
This is concerning because there is no method by which the auditor has of knowing whether the patient is actually making gains, or whether the engram is actually gaining in strength.
It is automatically assumed that confrontation with the engram is making it weaker; and to my mind this is a dangerous assumption to make.
For the reason I gave before, that it is possible a guilt complex can make a situation worse rather than better, I am concerned by one of the last paragraphs in this section, "If an auditor assumes the state of mind that he can sit and whistle while Rome burns before him and be prepared to grin about it, then he will do an optimum job. The things at which he gazes, no matter how they look, no matter how they sound, are solid gains. It's the quiet, orderly patient who is making few gains."
This is concerning because there is no method by which the auditor has of knowing whether the patient is actually making gains, or whether the engram is actually gaining in strength.
It is automatically assumed that confrontation with the engram is making it weaker; and to my mind this is a dangerous assumption to make.
Release or Clear
"The object of Dianetic therapy is to bring about a release or a clear.
A release (noun) is an individual from whom major stress and anxiety have been removed by Dianetic therapy.
A clear (noun) is an individual who, as a result of Dianetic therapy, has neither active nor perceived psychosomatic illness or aberation.
To clear(verb) is to release all the physical pain and painful emotion from the life of an individual or, as in Political Dianetics, a society."
My previous writings sum up my points on this chapter.
Firstly, a clear is not a maintainable state of being. The clear is not imune from further aberrations. Also, the fact of being clear can only be ascertained using current knowledge; which may actually be false. It is also only possible to audit known engrams and if engrams still exist which are not audited out, then the belief in being clear is simply that, a belief and not a known fact. It is, and can never be any more than, a state of belief rather than an actual, factual state of being.
Being clear is thus a state of mind; belief in being clear is just as belief in a deity. Unprovable and unshakable even in the face of fact, as the mind chooses to ignore all evidence to the contrary in the wish to maintain its belief.
The claims for a clear which are made by dianetics, have not been actually proven. In fact, all that I have encountered to this day, have actually disproven these claims and I can find no account of scientology actually providing a clear to the wider scientific community for thorough analysis of the claims made.
Secondly, achieving release has its dangers. If one seeks release from a situation where guilt is to a level where the individual must actively seek release, then there is the possibility that it can simply reinforce the guilt.
A release (noun) is an individual from whom major stress and anxiety have been removed by Dianetic therapy.
A clear (noun) is an individual who, as a result of Dianetic therapy, has neither active nor perceived psychosomatic illness or aberation.
To clear(verb) is to release all the physical pain and painful emotion from the life of an individual or, as in Political Dianetics, a society."
My previous writings sum up my points on this chapter.
Firstly, a clear is not a maintainable state of being. The clear is not imune from further aberrations. Also, the fact of being clear can only be ascertained using current knowledge; which may actually be false. It is also only possible to audit known engrams and if engrams still exist which are not audited out, then the belief in being clear is simply that, a belief and not a known fact. It is, and can never be any more than, a state of belief rather than an actual, factual state of being.
Being clear is thus a state of mind; belief in being clear is just as belief in a deity. Unprovable and unshakable even in the face of fact, as the mind chooses to ignore all evidence to the contrary in the wish to maintain its belief.
The claims for a clear which are made by dianetics, have not been actually proven. In fact, all that I have encountered to this day, have actually disproven these claims and I can find no account of scientology actually providing a clear to the wider scientific community for thorough analysis of the claims made.
Secondly, achieving release has its dangers. If one seeks release from a situation where guilt is to a level where the individual must actively seek release, then there is the possibility that it can simply reinforce the guilt.
The Mind's Protection
"The mind is a self-protecting mechanism." OK, I'm prepared to consider this as a valid statement. Let's delve deeper.
Auditors will make mistakes, but nothing that can't be remedied. There are thousands of ways to get in to trouble with mental healing. Fine. I'm happy with those statements.
When it comes to, "The mind will not permit itself to be seriously overloaded so long as it can retain partial awareness of itself; it can only be overloaded when its awareness is reduced to a point where it cannot evaluate anything; it can then be thoroughly upset." I have to admit to struggling. On the face of it, this is contradicting itself. As long as the mind is at least partially aware of itself, then it can't be overloaded. If the mind is not aware of itself then it can be overloaded. The key things I find myself asking are, how does the mind lose awareness of itself if not through overloading, and if the mind hasn't got awareness of itself then how is it aware of other things by which it can be overloaded?
The only answer of this, for me, is that the mind must be in a state of trance. According to the dictionary, "an abnormal state of suspended consciousness." Dianetics claims the state to be, "reverie," which is explained by the dictionary as, "Musing; a day dream." This contrasts with the definition of reverie given by Dianetics to be, "a label introduced to make the patient feel that his state has altered and that he has gone into a state where his memory is very good or where he can do something he couldn't ordinarily do before. The actuality is that he is able to do it all the time anyway. It is not a strange state. The person is wide awake, but merely by asking him to close his eyes he is technically in reverie."
So, in order to achieve results during auditing, the person is encouraged in to a mode which is not a hypnotic trance, but is neither being fully conscious. The mode suggested by page 236 (page 2 of this chapter) is that the person is susceptible to suggestion; the manner by which past events can be analysed by the auditor through bypassing the protections of the fully conscious and wilful mind. The event can then be revisited and analysed for the impact that it had on the person, and the power of the emotional response to the situation, re-programmed.
In short, this is coming down to the age old adages of a problem shared being a problem halved and, in the case of dianetic application of this technique, having the support of another in a calm and perceived safe environment, to go through traumas experience and analyse them. To this extent, what I have read in this chapter is what the human race has been doing for years. The fact that Dianetics has observed these events and written them down does, indeed, classify this as being science of the mind; the pursuit of systematic and formulated knowledge on the subject of the minds behaviour.
I do recall Hubbard writing, somewhere else in this book, that Dianetics can not be outlawed because it is on the basis of one man simply talking to another. In that, I am in agreement with the foundational principle.
Now that I have reached this point in understanding, I have to take issue with the protection of the mind in these circumstances and the claim that any damage encountered through such a process can be undone. This is combined with the moral aspect of treatment. Where confronting a truth of a situation can, in itself, incur damage to the mind. One strong example is where this is a result of actions that the individual perceives as being bad and shameful, for example post-war veterans who pulled the trigger and killed people; whether enemy or innocents; this changes a person. To remove that responsibility, there seems from what I have been reading, to be only two ways out. One is to remove or shift responsibility for the actions; eg. following orders for the greater good. The other is to enforce belief that the end justified the means.
When public support wanes for a war and the justification in a war is thrown in to question, or the soldier in question ended up killing innocents, even by accident, then it can be seen that in order to alleviate the guilt in these cases, may be seen by some as introducing or reinforcing lies in order to alleviate engrams of guilt. That is, then, a very awkward ethical question.
In the everyday, it might be the result of seeing someone lying on the street, crying for help but walking past them doing nothing. What is worse, the guilt of doing nothing and walking by, or trying to do something for them but ultimately losing the battle to save their life? Seeing a pickpocket at work but failing to raise the alarm. Little things like that will result in engrams that can only be faced by repentance, or by forging a means of justification to appease the guilt.
Messing around with serious guilt complexes can send people in to downward spirals from which they might never come out, if they refuse to accept the forged justification and haven't got the soul to feel genuine repentance and acknowledge their feelings for their actions.
Thus, I take issue with the claim that an auditor can do no damage by reverie.
Auditors will make mistakes, but nothing that can't be remedied. There are thousands of ways to get in to trouble with mental healing. Fine. I'm happy with those statements.
When it comes to, "The mind will not permit itself to be seriously overloaded so long as it can retain partial awareness of itself; it can only be overloaded when its awareness is reduced to a point where it cannot evaluate anything; it can then be thoroughly upset." I have to admit to struggling. On the face of it, this is contradicting itself. As long as the mind is at least partially aware of itself, then it can't be overloaded. If the mind is not aware of itself then it can be overloaded. The key things I find myself asking are, how does the mind lose awareness of itself if not through overloading, and if the mind hasn't got awareness of itself then how is it aware of other things by which it can be overloaded?
The only answer of this, for me, is that the mind must be in a state of trance. According to the dictionary, "an abnormal state of suspended consciousness." Dianetics claims the state to be, "reverie," which is explained by the dictionary as, "Musing; a day dream." This contrasts with the definition of reverie given by Dianetics to be, "a label introduced to make the patient feel that his state has altered and that he has gone into a state where his memory is very good or where he can do something he couldn't ordinarily do before. The actuality is that he is able to do it all the time anyway. It is not a strange state. The person is wide awake, but merely by asking him to close his eyes he is technically in reverie."
So, in order to achieve results during auditing, the person is encouraged in to a mode which is not a hypnotic trance, but is neither being fully conscious. The mode suggested by page 236 (page 2 of this chapter) is that the person is susceptible to suggestion; the manner by which past events can be analysed by the auditor through bypassing the protections of the fully conscious and wilful mind. The event can then be revisited and analysed for the impact that it had on the person, and the power of the emotional response to the situation, re-programmed.
In short, this is coming down to the age old adages of a problem shared being a problem halved and, in the case of dianetic application of this technique, having the support of another in a calm and perceived safe environment, to go through traumas experience and analyse them. To this extent, what I have read in this chapter is what the human race has been doing for years. The fact that Dianetics has observed these events and written them down does, indeed, classify this as being science of the mind; the pursuit of systematic and formulated knowledge on the subject of the minds behaviour.
I do recall Hubbard writing, somewhere else in this book, that Dianetics can not be outlawed because it is on the basis of one man simply talking to another. In that, I am in agreement with the foundational principle.
Now that I have reached this point in understanding, I have to take issue with the protection of the mind in these circumstances and the claim that any damage encountered through such a process can be undone. This is combined with the moral aspect of treatment. Where confronting a truth of a situation can, in itself, incur damage to the mind. One strong example is where this is a result of actions that the individual perceives as being bad and shameful, for example post-war veterans who pulled the trigger and killed people; whether enemy or innocents; this changes a person. To remove that responsibility, there seems from what I have been reading, to be only two ways out. One is to remove or shift responsibility for the actions; eg. following orders for the greater good. The other is to enforce belief that the end justified the means.
When public support wanes for a war and the justification in a war is thrown in to question, or the soldier in question ended up killing innocents, even by accident, then it can be seen that in order to alleviate the guilt in these cases, may be seen by some as introducing or reinforcing lies in order to alleviate engrams of guilt. That is, then, a very awkward ethical question.
In the everyday, it might be the result of seeing someone lying on the street, crying for help but walking past them doing nothing. What is worse, the guilt of doing nothing and walking by, or trying to do something for them but ultimately losing the battle to save their life? Seeing a pickpocket at work but failing to raise the alarm. Little things like that will result in engrams that can only be faced by repentance, or by forging a means of justification to appease the guilt.
Messing around with serious guilt complexes can send people in to downward spirals from which they might never come out, if they refuse to accept the forged justification and haven't got the soul to feel genuine repentance and acknowledge their feelings for their actions.
Thus, I take issue with the claim that an auditor can do no damage by reverie.
Book 2 - Conclusion
There is more in Preventative Dianetics which has to be analysed, beyond my previous conclusion.
Some things like the potential for injury on an individual who isn't mobile, for example. It stands to reason that if someone presses against you while you are standing, it is yourself that is in control of the resistance. If you are lying on a bed, then you are effectively a sandwich between the persons hand and the bed. There is no difference in the pressure of the hand; the difference is in the resistive force. There is actually no difference in the amount of damage that a given amount of pressure will have on a body; the difference is the ability to offer no resistance to the force when standing.
Hubbard attempts to put forward the act of a mother, in the late stages of pregnancy, damaging the child when tying shoelaces or lifting heavy objects; even going to the stage of describing that a babies head could be crushed if the mother collides with an object like a table edge. Hubbard writes this as if these are everyday incidents which are responsible for the engrams in us all at birth; a matter of fact style of writing which is evident throughout the book so far which makes rare occurrences seem almost every day.
I ask you to consider the last time you knew of an expectant mother who had a deadly collision with a table, or lifted heavy weights or even tied her shoelaces. We know about these things already and the mother herself has a safety mechanism ... pain ... which stops her from doing these things.
Another statement is, "Attempted abortion is very common. And remarkably lacking in success." which is taken to imply both a demonstration as to the strength of a foetus to survive and also that there is a high degree of attempted abortion which is causing engrams in children.
Sadly, this is yet another instance where there are no scientific proofs, figures, studies, nothing to back up this assertion. In reality in the modern world, especially the world where people are likely to be considering this work, the face of abortion has changed dramatically. It is safer, legal, and I don't know of any, "failures," as such. Therefore it is easy to see that in our societies, failed abortion is quite a rare occurrence; we either have children carrying to full term, we have children still born, or we have children being aborted safely. Attempted abortion is more or less out of the window these days because there is more than adequate choice and support. Attempted abortion is nearly extinct in the developed countries; you either abort, or you don't.
We thus move on to the next assertion, "Morning sickness is entirely engramic, so fas as can be discovered, since Clears have not so far experience it during their own pregnancies." Let's take this page from the American Pregnancy Association, "More than half of all pregnant women experience morning sickness" What do we take from this? Even from the statistical standpoint, if both statements were true then roughly a little under half the mothers in the US are clear, without the support of Dianetics, and don't know about it.
To go further and investigate what medical science has to say on the causes of morning sickness, the NHS has this to offer...
The exact cause of nausea and vomiting in pregnancy (NVP) is unknown. However, a number of different causes have been suggested, including:
* increased oestrogen levels
* increased human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) levels
* nutritional deficiency
* gastric problems
* evolutionary adaptation
* psychological influences
The psychological influences are quoted as, "Although it is not a very popular theory, it has been suggested that NVP may be the result of the body responding to stress or negative feelings towards the pregnancy. Conversely, it has also been suggested that these psychological symptoms may possibly be the result of NVP." So while considerable research world wide with statistics and studies to back them up, has not got a solid conclusion, Dianetics is offering a conclusion based on ... oh yes ... as usual, despite the statement of, "The entire field has been a subject of considerable research in Dianetics," ... no research whatsoever is to be found or referenced.
The numbers are not adding up here.
At the very best possible way of supporting Dianetic theory at this point, we might conclude that as fluctuating human beings, we naturally pass in and out of, "clear," through our lives.
The unsubstantiated statements continue to pour one on top of the other until we hit another blinder, "A cleared mother needs no anaesthetic." Oh boy. According to the statements prior, we can conclude that half the women giving birth in the US are clear. So now we need statistics as to how many of them use anaesthetic.
The first statistic I came up with was for a segment of Australia where the NSW Department of Health said that the rates of women receiving spinals were 4.9% in 1999 and 6.1% in 2000. This is akin, according to Dianetics, to roughly 95% of all women in New South Wales, being clear.
I did face a problem here in that there are no accurate statistics available that I can find which are specifically for USA natural births. The statistics found world wide so far do throw considerable doubt on the Dianetics statements and once statistics do surface, providing that they are in line with the rest of the developed world, they will deliver a death blow to the unsubstantiated and contradictory statements that are being made in this book.
There is another question related to the research element. Returning to the claims that much investigation has been carried out in Dianetics; or subjects have been the subject of much research; to this we have the claim documented in Wikipedia that, "Hubbard always claimed that his ideas of Dianetics originated in the 1920s and 1930s. By his own account, he spent a great deal of time in the Oak Knoll Naval Hospital's library, where he would have encountered the work of Freud and other psychoanalysts." so that by the time Dianetics was brought to the world in the 1950's, it was based not on dianetic research, but on analysis of non-dianetic research. To this point there is no serious trace visible or accounted that I can find, which actually shows any investigative research on the behalf of dianetics itself. Narconon wasn't formed until 1966 and Criminon didn't fire up until 2000. Second Chance, 1995.
The fact remains that of all the organisations listed, there is no research body easily identifiable that would have generated the research listed herein. Also, there is mismatch between the language and assertions made in the book and the original publishing date of 1992. The details on abortion suggest that little has changed in the book since its original publication in the 1950's. If this is the case, then even the limited research done by Narconon wouldn't have even gone one step toward being counted as being the dianetic research so often quoted in this book thus far.
There remains ... no evidence of any specific dianetic research whatsoever ... without which, this book remains to this point, a collection of unsubstantiated personal beliefs.
Next up ... once I can summon the energy to waste my time on this ... Book 3 - Therapy
Some things like the potential for injury on an individual who isn't mobile, for example. It stands to reason that if someone presses against you while you are standing, it is yourself that is in control of the resistance. If you are lying on a bed, then you are effectively a sandwich between the persons hand and the bed. There is no difference in the pressure of the hand; the difference is in the resistive force. There is actually no difference in the amount of damage that a given amount of pressure will have on a body; the difference is the ability to offer no resistance to the force when standing.
Hubbard attempts to put forward the act of a mother, in the late stages of pregnancy, damaging the child when tying shoelaces or lifting heavy objects; even going to the stage of describing that a babies head could be crushed if the mother collides with an object like a table edge. Hubbard writes this as if these are everyday incidents which are responsible for the engrams in us all at birth; a matter of fact style of writing which is evident throughout the book so far which makes rare occurrences seem almost every day.
I ask you to consider the last time you knew of an expectant mother who had a deadly collision with a table, or lifted heavy weights or even tied her shoelaces. We know about these things already and the mother herself has a safety mechanism ... pain ... which stops her from doing these things.
Another statement is, "Attempted abortion is very common. And remarkably lacking in success." which is taken to imply both a demonstration as to the strength of a foetus to survive and also that there is a high degree of attempted abortion which is causing engrams in children.
Sadly, this is yet another instance where there are no scientific proofs, figures, studies, nothing to back up this assertion. In reality in the modern world, especially the world where people are likely to be considering this work, the face of abortion has changed dramatically. It is safer, legal, and I don't know of any, "failures," as such. Therefore it is easy to see that in our societies, failed abortion is quite a rare occurrence; we either have children carrying to full term, we have children still born, or we have children being aborted safely. Attempted abortion is more or less out of the window these days because there is more than adequate choice and support. Attempted abortion is nearly extinct in the developed countries; you either abort, or you don't.
We thus move on to the next assertion, "Morning sickness is entirely engramic, so fas as can be discovered, since Clears have not so far experience it during their own pregnancies." Let's take this page from the American Pregnancy Association, "More than half of all pregnant women experience morning sickness" What do we take from this? Even from the statistical standpoint, if both statements were true then roughly a little under half the mothers in the US are clear, without the support of Dianetics, and don't know about it.
To go further and investigate what medical science has to say on the causes of morning sickness, the NHS has this to offer...
The exact cause of nausea and vomiting in pregnancy (NVP) is unknown. However, a number of different causes have been suggested, including:
* increased oestrogen levels
* increased human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) levels
* nutritional deficiency
* gastric problems
* evolutionary adaptation
* psychological influences
The psychological influences are quoted as, "Although it is not a very popular theory, it has been suggested that NVP may be the result of the body responding to stress or negative feelings towards the pregnancy. Conversely, it has also been suggested that these psychological symptoms may possibly be the result of NVP." So while considerable research world wide with statistics and studies to back them up, has not got a solid conclusion, Dianetics is offering a conclusion based on ... oh yes ... as usual, despite the statement of, "The entire field has been a subject of considerable research in Dianetics," ... no research whatsoever is to be found or referenced.
The numbers are not adding up here.
At the very best possible way of supporting Dianetic theory at this point, we might conclude that as fluctuating human beings, we naturally pass in and out of, "clear," through our lives.
The unsubstantiated statements continue to pour one on top of the other until we hit another blinder, "A cleared mother needs no anaesthetic." Oh boy. According to the statements prior, we can conclude that half the women giving birth in the US are clear. So now we need statistics as to how many of them use anaesthetic.
The first statistic I came up with was for a segment of Australia where the NSW Department of Health said that the rates of women receiving spinals were 4.9% in 1999 and 6.1% in 2000. This is akin, according to Dianetics, to roughly 95% of all women in New South Wales, being clear.
I did face a problem here in that there are no accurate statistics available that I can find which are specifically for USA natural births. The statistics found world wide so far do throw considerable doubt on the Dianetics statements and once statistics do surface, providing that they are in line with the rest of the developed world, they will deliver a death blow to the unsubstantiated and contradictory statements that are being made in this book.
There is another question related to the research element. Returning to the claims that much investigation has been carried out in Dianetics; or subjects have been the subject of much research; to this we have the claim documented in Wikipedia that, "Hubbard always claimed that his ideas of Dianetics originated in the 1920s and 1930s. By his own account, he spent a great deal of time in the Oak Knoll Naval Hospital's library, where he would have encountered the work of Freud and other psychoanalysts." so that by the time Dianetics was brought to the world in the 1950's, it was based not on dianetic research, but on analysis of non-dianetic research. To this point there is no serious trace visible or accounted that I can find, which actually shows any investigative research on the behalf of dianetics itself. Narconon wasn't formed until 1966 and Criminon didn't fire up until 2000. Second Chance, 1995.
The fact remains that of all the organisations listed, there is no research body easily identifiable that would have generated the research listed herein. Also, there is mismatch between the language and assertions made in the book and the original publishing date of 1992. The details on abortion suggest that little has changed in the book since its original publication in the 1950's. If this is the case, then even the limited research done by Narconon wouldn't have even gone one step toward being counted as being the dianetic research so often quoted in this book thus far.
There remains ... no evidence of any specific dianetic research whatsoever ... without which, this book remains to this point, a collection of unsubstantiated personal beliefs.
Next up ... once I can summon the energy to waste my time on this ... Book 3 - Therapy
Preventative Dianetics
If you're following this, you'll guess it has taken me a good while to get over the unbelievable stuff written in Keying In The Engram. Well, here I am, trying to finish the job once more. We're now facing the end of Book Two, namely, "Preventative Dianetics."
We get to the bottom of the first page and it bloody well starts again. The basis of preventative dianetics is this; "If one knows the cause of something, he can usually prevent the cause from going in to effect." The example given here is that as we understand mosquitoes carry malaria, we can take steps to avoid malaria by stopping the mosquitoes. Fair enough.
The link is used to lend credence to the following statement, "Similarly, when one knows the cause of aberration and psychosomatic illness, he can do a great deal toward preventing them." Right. Let's take a look again at what I wrote concerning, "Contagion of Aberration."
An aberration is caused by an engram and an engram occurs in a moment of unconsciousness. Also, engrams are the only source of psychosomatic ills.
Everything is down to engrams and the individuals ability to control them.
Right.
My understanding then tallies with a statement in the next paragraph. The cause of an engram is further referenced, "The engram is actually a very simple thing; it is a moment when the analytical mind is shut down by physical pain, drugs or other means, and the reactive bank is open to the receipt of a recording."
For a start, the wider concept of engrams doesn't stand up; as I wrote before. For time immemorial, human beings run on the belief of what they know in the here and now, is right. If later proof shows them to be wrong, then what they have believed is an engram. If the engram determines fate, as claimed in this chapter, then that adequately sums up the whole situation; everyone is living at the hands of their engrams, unable to know whether they have engrams or not, because no one actually KNOWS the truth ... many believe it but no one actually KNOWS it ... and there is no way to determine the presence or absence of an engram.
In fact, if I take the claims of the car accidents on page 221 to its logical conclusion, then so long as I drive my car and don't have or cause an accident, then I haven't got an engram. The moment I have an accident, it proves that I have an engram. But that doesn't rule out the very real probability that I had carried an engram and it chose that moment to surface and cause me to have an accident.
You know, here in deepest Sussex, I have a whistle. So long as I blow it every day without fail, no wild elephants will come near. So far, it's worked.
(there are no wild elephants in Sussex. Therefore it doesn't matter whether or not I blow the damn whistle. The reality here is that there is nothing present which will disprove my belief; so I consider my belief to be valid. This is a premise which I have seen throughout this book.)
"In the individual, the prevention of engrams is a very easy matter. Once the source of aberration and illness is known, one can prevent the source from entering a life." This is impossible. The very core of being, is of being aberrated. As discussed before, it is impossible for a human being to remain clear, therefore aberrations are present and the source can not be removed ... because the source is the human race.
This next few paragraphs prove my point...
"Taking the key-in first, there are two things which can be done to prevent it. The child can be given a calm and harmonious atmosphere which is not restimulative or, if the child appears to be restimulated despite kindly treatment, he can be removed to another environment which will be minus the two most certain sources - his father and mother - and which will contain a source of affection. The rest of whether or not a child is restrimulated, prespeech or post speech, is very simple. Is he succeptivle to illness? Does he eat well? Is he nervous? There can be actual physical things wrong with the child, of course, but these are quickly established by a doctor and they lie in the category of physical derangement.
Quarrels within the hearing of a child, loud noises, frantic conduct, drooling sympathy when he is sick or hurt: these things are some of the key-in catalogue. These make a child ill physically and aberrated mentally by keying in hie engrams. And nobody can say how many he has!"
This is basically talking about the repression of what is the human spirit. It is the pre-cursor to what we today talk about as wrapping a child in bubble wrap to protect it. However it is only by engaging in the rough and tumble that the child will learn about life.
And this is where my conclusion comes for this part of the book; the human species is aberrated by life; by design. If we imagine that we actually knew truth from falsehood, right from wrong and the planet has been cleared, then it would only last but a brief moment before life itself would aberrate an individual. It is an impossible state to achieve, even if it were believed to be desirable.
But we don't know the truth. We don't know what is right. We only believe that we know what is true; it is up to tomorrow to deliver judgement on what we hold as fact, and then a further tomorrow might upset that belief again.
This is because the human race does not hold the sum knowledge of the universe; and until we do, freedom from engrams is not possible.
We get to the bottom of the first page and it bloody well starts again. The basis of preventative dianetics is this; "If one knows the cause of something, he can usually prevent the cause from going in to effect." The example given here is that as we understand mosquitoes carry malaria, we can take steps to avoid malaria by stopping the mosquitoes. Fair enough.
The link is used to lend credence to the following statement, "Similarly, when one knows the cause of aberration and psychosomatic illness, he can do a great deal toward preventing them." Right. Let's take a look again at what I wrote concerning, "Contagion of Aberration."
| On page 61 we receive the definition of an aberration - "Aberrations, under which is included all deranged or irrational behaviour, are caused by engrams. They are stimulus-response, pro- and contrasurvival." Thus from the readings to this point it can only be concluded that an aberration is not, in itself, contagious. Rather, the engram in an individual causes aberrations which affect a persons behaviour and this behaviour then causes engrams to be created in others and these engrams create aberrations in the, "infected," individual. That makes sense. What doesn't make sense is the definition of an engram also on 61 that states, "The engram is the single source of aberrations and psychosomatic ills. Moments of 'unconsciousness' where the analytical mind is attenuated in greater or lesser degree are the only moments when engrams can be received" |
An aberration is caused by an engram and an engram occurs in a moment of unconsciousness. Also, engrams are the only source of psychosomatic ills.
Everything is down to engrams and the individuals ability to control them.
Right.
My understanding then tallies with a statement in the next paragraph. The cause of an engram is further referenced, "The engram is actually a very simple thing; it is a moment when the analytical mind is shut down by physical pain, drugs or other means, and the reactive bank is open to the receipt of a recording."
For a start, the wider concept of engrams doesn't stand up; as I wrote before. For time immemorial, human beings run on the belief of what they know in the here and now, is right. If later proof shows them to be wrong, then what they have believed is an engram. If the engram determines fate, as claimed in this chapter, then that adequately sums up the whole situation; everyone is living at the hands of their engrams, unable to know whether they have engrams or not, because no one actually KNOWS the truth ... many believe it but no one actually KNOWS it ... and there is no way to determine the presence or absence of an engram.
In fact, if I take the claims of the car accidents on page 221 to its logical conclusion, then so long as I drive my car and don't have or cause an accident, then I haven't got an engram. The moment I have an accident, it proves that I have an engram. But that doesn't rule out the very real probability that I had carried an engram and it chose that moment to surface and cause me to have an accident.
You know, here in deepest Sussex, I have a whistle. So long as I blow it every day without fail, no wild elephants will come near. So far, it's worked.
(there are no wild elephants in Sussex. Therefore it doesn't matter whether or not I blow the damn whistle. The reality here is that there is nothing present which will disprove my belief; so I consider my belief to be valid. This is a premise which I have seen throughout this book.)
| An interesting concept is the freedom of information. It is this freedom which enables human beings to examine all the available facts and thus form their beliefs. If some facts are withheld or the individual is prevented from viewing all angles to an argument then it is impossible for them to form a balanced and just belief. If I had access to the fact that there are no wild elephants in Sussex, then I might conclude myself that there is no worth in blowing the whistle. The only result of withholding information, or preventing an individual access to information, is to try and influence their resultant belief. Therefore it is important to view any individual or organisation which practices such limiting behaviour, with suspicion. |
"In the individual, the prevention of engrams is a very easy matter. Once the source of aberration and illness is known, one can prevent the source from entering a life." This is impossible. The very core of being, is of being aberrated. As discussed before, it is impossible for a human being to remain clear, therefore aberrations are present and the source can not be removed ... because the source is the human race.
This next few paragraphs prove my point...
"Taking the key-in first, there are two things which can be done to prevent it. The child can be given a calm and harmonious atmosphere which is not restimulative or, if the child appears to be restimulated despite kindly treatment, he can be removed to another environment which will be minus the two most certain sources - his father and mother - and which will contain a source of affection. The rest of whether or not a child is restrimulated, prespeech or post speech, is very simple. Is he succeptivle to illness? Does he eat well? Is he nervous? There can be actual physical things wrong with the child, of course, but these are quickly established by a doctor and they lie in the category of physical derangement.
Quarrels within the hearing of a child, loud noises, frantic conduct, drooling sympathy when he is sick or hurt: these things are some of the key-in catalogue. These make a child ill physically and aberrated mentally by keying in hie engrams. And nobody can say how many he has!"
This is basically talking about the repression of what is the human spirit. It is the pre-cursor to what we today talk about as wrapping a child in bubble wrap to protect it. However it is only by engaging in the rough and tumble that the child will learn about life.
And this is where my conclusion comes for this part of the book; the human species is aberrated by life; by design. If we imagine that we actually knew truth from falsehood, right from wrong and the planet has been cleared, then it would only last but a brief moment before life itself would aberrate an individual. It is an impossible state to achieve, even if it were believed to be desirable.
But we don't know the truth. We don't know what is right. We only believe that we know what is true; it is up to tomorrow to deliver judgement on what we hold as fact, and then a further tomorrow might upset that belief again.
This is because the human race does not hold the sum knowledge of the universe; and until we do, freedom from engrams is not possible.
Keying in the engram
Now this starts off with a really odd, unproven premise. That a child can carry an engram but it can lay dormant. Once keyed in, or triggered if you will, the child then suffers a degradation in physical health and a beginning of suffering headaches. These are very specific claims for which, again, as usual, there is nothing to back them up.
Some of the claims here become more and more unbelievable, "It may be that a patient is urgent in her insistence that her father raped her when she was nine and that this is the cause of all her misery. Large numbers of insane patients claims this. And it is perfectly true. Father did rape her but it happened she was only nine days beyond conception at the time." Even at the stage of one month the baby is still an embryo. How the fuck is a child, which hasn't even got a brain at this point in their development, supposed to hold a memory of a mothers sex with the father?
"Psychotic women often maintain, after they are awakened from a drugged sleep (and sometimes a hypnotic sleep), that they have been raped. Men occasionally maintain that the operator has tried to perform a homosexual act upon them while they were drugged." You know, I really do wish that this sodding book contained references to the material it is purportedly reporting as I can't find anything on this, myself.
"One is reminded of a case which has severe asthma. He had received it in a very severe birth engram; his frantic parents carried him to every mountain asthma resort suggested and spent tens of thousands of dollars in these jauntings. When this patient was cleared and the engram refiled, it was discovered that the restimulator for his asthma was clean, cold air! The only certainty in the environment approach is that a sickly child will recover when removed from restimulative parents and taken where he is loved and feels safe - for his sickness is the inevitable result of restimulation of prenatal engrams by one or the other or both his parents."
Lets examine this. Asthma is when breathing is made difficult due to a narrowing of the airways that lead to the lungs. This is due to a swelling or inflamation and has various triggers. Amazingly, one of those triggers includes cold air...
Yahoo Health - "Asthma affects people in different ways. Some people only have asthma attacks during allergy season, or when they breathe in cold air, or when they exercise. Others have many bad attacks that send them to the doctor often."
National Institute for Health - "Common asthma triggers include:
eMedicine Health - "Each person with asthma has his or her own unique set of triggers. Most triggers cause attacks in some people with asthma and not in others. Common triggers of asthma attacks are the following:
So, there is a physical trigger. Where one might argue that clean, cold air should be good for the body and soul, in some cases it is not and there is a logical, medical trigger which has been the subject of far more scientific research than the claims in Dianetics has.
Then we come to something very interesting. Hang on because this is a bit of a ride...
In the educational field, new data or enthusiasms may very well key out engrams by overbalancing the reactive mind in the light of a new analytical surge. If a man can simply be convinced he has been fighting shadows or if he can be persuaded to hang his fears on some indicated cause, whether that cause is true or not, e can be benefited. Sometimes he can be 'educated' into a strong faith in some deity or cult which will cause him to feel so invulnerable that he rises above his engrams. Raising his survival potential in any way will raise his general tone to a point where it is no longer on a par with the reactive bank. Giving him an education in engineering or music, where he can receive a higher level of respect, will often defend him from his restimulators. A rise to a position of esteem is actually a change of environment, but it is also educational since he is now taught he is valuable. If a man can be made busy at a hobby or work by personal or exterior education that it is good for him, another mechanism comes in to being: the analytical mind becomes so engrossed that it takes to itself more and more energy for its activity and begins to align with a new purpose.
The first few sentences describes quite adequately why a cult or religion is successful. Make someone believe in something and the problems will fade out of the picture. It is unfortunate that in these cases, the problems may not disappear, in fact may get worse; but the person doesn't care because the fears have been tagged, filed and are put on the side lines; even if the basis for this is completely untrue and unfounded.
This paragraph is, in fact, a very good explanation of why it is better to tackle the issues you are facing in life rather than trying to side line them with beliefs of things which are not true; ie. joining a religion or a cult. Which, incidentally, is exactly what you are doing by deciding to follow scientology; whether you call it a religion or a cult ... according to this paragraph, it is the same thing.
Also concerning is this...
"On the physical therapy level, anything as violent as surgery or exodontistry in the psychosomatic plane is utter barbarism in the light of Dianetics. 'Toothache' is normally psychosomatic. Organic illnesses enough to fill several catalogs are psychosomatic. No recourse to surgery of any kind should be had until it is certain that the ailment is not psychosomatic or that the illness will not diminish by itself if the potency of the reactive mind is reduced. Mental-physical therapy is too ridiculous, with the source of aberration now a science, to be seriously mentioned. for no thinking doctor or psychiatrist possessed of this information would touch another electrode for electric shock therapy or even glance at a scalpel or ice pick to perform an operation on the pre frontal lobes of the brain unless that doctor or psychiatrist is himself so thoroughly aberrated that the act springs not from any desire to heal, but from the most utter and craven sadism to which engrams can bring a man."
Claiming that toothache is normally psychosomatic is basically down to how a person takes care of their teeth. That is the only way that I can equate a mental process as having a bearing on the coming about of toothache to the, "normal," degree claimed. However, is failure to care for ones teeth a conscious or unconscious thought process? Debatable, certainly. Scientifically provable? Unlikely.
However, once something like toothache has come about, it is a physical condition resulting from the physical deterioration and while I do not dispute that it is possible to mentally condition to block out pain or for stress to prevent the mental ability to focus on blocking the pain, getting the mind to reverse the damage caused to bone tissue is not so easy. In fact, the best I can think of is to create an environment where the normal bodily healing will take place on its own accord.
Again, we are basically back to the anecdotal evidence of the person in hospital who's recovery is affected by how they feel.
Also unfortunately, Mental-physical therapy is not ridiculous because the source of aberration is still not a science; and so long as this book continues to offer no actual science or research, that situation will continue.
The last sections claims that the process of electro convulsive therapy and pre-frontal lobotomy is the work of sadists rather than a genuine desire to improve the patients well being. This is a very nasty and deliberately directed venom of hatred. It only takes a look through history and even the present day, to find numerous examples of where a medicinal practice was carried out because of the belief that it was doing good; where all research and reasoning led those of their professions to believe that they were doing the right thing.
That later and improved research and experience proves that this isn't the case, is inevitable in a great many instances, not only in the field of psychiatric medicine, and to ignore this in judgement of what was done in the name of psychiatric science is a dangerous game indeed; inciting hatred of an entire branch of science and the people who become involved for the belief that they are improving the lives of people; for reasons which hold little water in the cold light of day.
I do not doubt that there are likely individuals who will inevitably bring shame on the practice, as there are in any field; religion included. However, to paint the entire science with the same brush is nothing but lunacy in my opinion.
You don't even need to restrain your examination to the field of medical and psychiatric research to find numerous examples of people doing wrong when they believed that they were doing right. Hindsight is always 20:20.
Not only that, but one has to question the involvement in dianetics. Is this nothing other than another example of people doing the wrong thing while believing that they are doing the right thing? It is a very valid question to ask, especially because of the lack of any actual evidence, research or reference contained in this work.
Some of the claims here become more and more unbelievable, "It may be that a patient is urgent in her insistence that her father raped her when she was nine and that this is the cause of all her misery. Large numbers of insane patients claims this. And it is perfectly true. Father did rape her but it happened she was only nine days beyond conception at the time." Even at the stage of one month the baby is still an embryo. How the fuck is a child, which hasn't even got a brain at this point in their development, supposed to hold a memory of a mothers sex with the father?
"Psychotic women often maintain, after they are awakened from a drugged sleep (and sometimes a hypnotic sleep), that they have been raped. Men occasionally maintain that the operator has tried to perform a homosexual act upon them while they were drugged." You know, I really do wish that this sodding book contained references to the material it is purportedly reporting as I can't find anything on this, myself.
"One is reminded of a case which has severe asthma. He had received it in a very severe birth engram; his frantic parents carried him to every mountain asthma resort suggested and spent tens of thousands of dollars in these jauntings. When this patient was cleared and the engram refiled, it was discovered that the restimulator for his asthma was clean, cold air! The only certainty in the environment approach is that a sickly child will recover when removed from restimulative parents and taken where he is loved and feels safe - for his sickness is the inevitable result of restimulation of prenatal engrams by one or the other or both his parents."
Lets examine this. Asthma is when breathing is made difficult due to a narrowing of the airways that lead to the lungs. This is due to a swelling or inflamation and has various triggers. Amazingly, one of those triggers includes cold air...
Yahoo Health - "Asthma affects people in different ways. Some people only have asthma attacks during allergy season, or when they breathe in cold air, or when they exercise. Others have many bad attacks that send them to the doctor often."
National Institute for Health - "Common asthma triggers include:
* Animals (pet hair or dander)
* Dust
* Changes in weather (most often cold weather)
* Chemicals in the air or in food
* Exercise
* Mold
* Pollen
* Respiratory infections, such as the common cold
* Strong emotions (stress)
* Tobacco smokeeMedicine Health - "Each person with asthma has his or her own unique set of triggers. Most triggers cause attacks in some people with asthma and not in others. Common triggers of asthma attacks are the following:
* exposure to tobacco or wood smoke,
* breathing polluted air,
* inhaling other respiratory irritants such as perfumes or cleaning products,
* exposure to airway irritants at the workplace,
* breathing in allergy-causing substances (allergens) such as molds, dust, or animal dander,
* an upper respiratory infection, such as a cold, flu, sinusitis, or bronchitis,
* exposure to cold, dry weather,
* emotional excitement or stress,
* physical exertion or exercise,
* reflux of stomach acid known as gastroesophageal reflux disease, or GERD,
* sulfites, an additive to some foods and wine, and
* menstruation: In some, not all, women, asthma symptoms are closely tied to the menstrual cycle.So, there is a physical trigger. Where one might argue that clean, cold air should be good for the body and soul, in some cases it is not and there is a logical, medical trigger which has been the subject of far more scientific research than the claims in Dianetics has.
Then we come to something very interesting. Hang on because this is a bit of a ride...
In the educational field, new data or enthusiasms may very well key out engrams by overbalancing the reactive mind in the light of a new analytical surge. If a man can simply be convinced he has been fighting shadows or if he can be persuaded to hang his fears on some indicated cause, whether that cause is true or not, e can be benefited. Sometimes he can be 'educated' into a strong faith in some deity or cult which will cause him to feel so invulnerable that he rises above his engrams. Raising his survival potential in any way will raise his general tone to a point where it is no longer on a par with the reactive bank. Giving him an education in engineering or music, where he can receive a higher level of respect, will often defend him from his restimulators. A rise to a position of esteem is actually a change of environment, but it is also educational since he is now taught he is valuable. If a man can be made busy at a hobby or work by personal or exterior education that it is good for him, another mechanism comes in to being: the analytical mind becomes so engrossed that it takes to itself more and more energy for its activity and begins to align with a new purpose.
The first few sentences describes quite adequately why a cult or religion is successful. Make someone believe in something and the problems will fade out of the picture. It is unfortunate that in these cases, the problems may not disappear, in fact may get worse; but the person doesn't care because the fears have been tagged, filed and are put on the side lines; even if the basis for this is completely untrue and unfounded.
This paragraph is, in fact, a very good explanation of why it is better to tackle the issues you are facing in life rather than trying to side line them with beliefs of things which are not true; ie. joining a religion or a cult. Which, incidentally, is exactly what you are doing by deciding to follow scientology; whether you call it a religion or a cult ... according to this paragraph, it is the same thing.
Also concerning is this...
"On the physical therapy level, anything as violent as surgery or exodontistry in the psychosomatic plane is utter barbarism in the light of Dianetics. 'Toothache' is normally psychosomatic. Organic illnesses enough to fill several catalogs are psychosomatic. No recourse to surgery of any kind should be had until it is certain that the ailment is not psychosomatic or that the illness will not diminish by itself if the potency of the reactive mind is reduced. Mental-physical therapy is too ridiculous, with the source of aberration now a science, to be seriously mentioned. for no thinking doctor or psychiatrist possessed of this information would touch another electrode for electric shock therapy or even glance at a scalpel or ice pick to perform an operation on the pre frontal lobes of the brain unless that doctor or psychiatrist is himself so thoroughly aberrated that the act springs not from any desire to heal, but from the most utter and craven sadism to which engrams can bring a man."
Claiming that toothache is normally psychosomatic is basically down to how a person takes care of their teeth. That is the only way that I can equate a mental process as having a bearing on the coming about of toothache to the, "normal," degree claimed. However, is failure to care for ones teeth a conscious or unconscious thought process? Debatable, certainly. Scientifically provable? Unlikely.
However, once something like toothache has come about, it is a physical condition resulting from the physical deterioration and while I do not dispute that it is possible to mentally condition to block out pain or for stress to prevent the mental ability to focus on blocking the pain, getting the mind to reverse the damage caused to bone tissue is not so easy. In fact, the best I can think of is to create an environment where the normal bodily healing will take place on its own accord.
Again, we are basically back to the anecdotal evidence of the person in hospital who's recovery is affected by how they feel.
Also unfortunately, Mental-physical therapy is not ridiculous because the source of aberration is still not a science; and so long as this book continues to offer no actual science or research, that situation will continue.
The last sections claims that the process of electro convulsive therapy and pre-frontal lobotomy is the work of sadists rather than a genuine desire to improve the patients well being. This is a very nasty and deliberately directed venom of hatred. It only takes a look through history and even the present day, to find numerous examples of where a medicinal practice was carried out because of the belief that it was doing good; where all research and reasoning led those of their professions to believe that they were doing the right thing.
That later and improved research and experience proves that this isn't the case, is inevitable in a great many instances, not only in the field of psychiatric medicine, and to ignore this in judgement of what was done in the name of psychiatric science is a dangerous game indeed; inciting hatred of an entire branch of science and the people who become involved for the belief that they are improving the lives of people; for reasons which hold little water in the cold light of day.
I do not doubt that there are likely individuals who will inevitably bring shame on the practice, as there are in any field; religion included. However, to paint the entire science with the same brush is nothing but lunacy in my opinion.
You don't even need to restrain your examination to the field of medical and psychiatric research to find numerous examples of people doing wrong when they believed that they were doing right. Hindsight is always 20:20.
Not only that, but one has to question the involvement in dianetics. Is this nothing other than another example of people doing the wrong thing while believing that they are doing the right thing? It is a very valid question to ask, especially because of the lack of any actual evidence, research or reference contained in this work.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)