We're starting to get somewhere with the application of the word, "survival," to mean procreation, self preservation, betterment of the culture (presumably specific to the race or local community) and of the species. There is, however, a claim that this is a scientific equation and there is still no evidence or even account of any of the experiments and observations that the chapter so neatly summarises ... again the reader is expected to take many things as read; conclusions without proof or reference. Not so good.
An equation is something which balances; two sides becoming equal ... I can't see any equation here; and without proofs or references, there is nothing scientific about this.
As there are people who exist to gain on one dynamic (self preservation and procreation) at the expense of other dynamics (achieving the previous two by the detriment of the society and even the species) I look to the chapter to explain the relation between these dynamics.
It is recognised that these dynamics play off each other and that the clear takes, by conscience, the mixture of the paths between these dynamics which yields the optimum resolution. In conclusion, this is the behaviour that anyone would expect of an honourable and respectable person. Someone who has a personality aberration in one of these areas would be deemed selfish or having their own agenda and thus not worthy of high consideration by their peers.
So, nothing new here. In fact, a simple and time honoured premise covered in a considerable number of words.
Next is a summary, but a quick glance sees it is talking about, "zones."
The Goal of Man
Right. The first page is already causing an issue. The long story short is that a line is drawn between the things that cause aberrations in a human being. On one side are the spiritual and on the other, the measurable, the factual. At the bottom of page one is the statement, "All factors necessary to the resolution of a science of the mind were found within the finite universe and were discovered, sensed, measured and experienced and became scientific truth." Measured by who? Who determined what factors were necessary? What of all the things that are on the other side of the line, like belief. This chapter is going to have to pull a bloody stunner later on if it wants me to take it as read that the spiritual plays no part in the goal of man or the survival of the species.
There was an excellent series of lines in, "The Flight of Dragons," which was concerned at the core thread of the story line, that man was choosing logic over magic and that the world of magic had to use the last of its power to place itself in a protected place away from man, but that it was always needed. The Green Wizard says, "There was a time between the waning age of enchantment and the dawning age of logic, when dragons flew the skies. Free and unencumbered. Look down there Gorbash, at the troubled world below us. All mankind is facing an epic choice, a world of magic or a world of science. Which shall it be?"
Carolinus - "I propose we create the last realm of magic. The magic realm. Where all enchanted things might retreat before their age ends. If we consolidate our powers there will be enough magic left to create such a place. Sealed off from the rest of the world by the mists of invisibility."
Omadon - "You would defeat science and logic with a foolish retirement village?"
Carolinus - "Not defeat, my brother, enhance. The world though it does not realise it, can not do without magic. For example; man hears of the dragons invulnerable skin and lo, he makes armour, battleships, tanks . A fairy flies and furiously jealous man himself defies gravity with machines he will call aeroplanes. A magician looks in to his crystal and sees and hears half way across the world. Ah, says man, if only it could be so; and centuries from now he conjurers up miracles but calls them radio and television. If man is to surmount the insurmountable there must always be magic to inspire him. The world needs magic. Magic can never die."
"Go, and you may never return to the magic realm. For even now the great dome of invisibility grows over our world to protect its sanctity for all time; and no one on the outside may enter its boundaries save for the length of a dream, or flash of an inspiration. But it will stay, through the years the centuries and the ages; a part of man for all time and whenever man needs magic, we will be here."
Contrast this with the line from Dianetics, "It is not a new thought that man is surviving. It is a new thought that man is motivated only by survival." This, I can not agree with. It may be the goal of a few, but not the whole planet. Survival is the continuation of the species. The goal of man is further from this; betterment of itself. Once man has sired the next generation and secured their survival, then what is left? There are those who's goal is greed; the collection and execution of power. There are those with their fingers upon the button of nuclear destruction. These men would think nothing of bringing chaos and death to the human species and the majority of creation and evolution on this planet. No; survival seems to be an afterthought.
To my mind, to ignore the soul in the equation of the human race is to cheapen our very existence.
So it is at this point that I am well out of sympathy with the books unsubstantiated claims. However, I move on.
"Once survival was isolated as the only dynamic of a life form which would explain all its activities, it was necessary to study further the action of survival." "The thrust of survival is away from death and toward immortality." Immortality is a singular; of the individual person and not the species. Survival can be taken as one of two meanings, either of the species of the individual. The title of the chapter is of the species. The two can't cross in this without repercussions in muddying the waters.
This chapter crosses the definitions of the individual and the species so many times that it doesn't make sense.
Next up, The Four Dynamics. Hopefully we'll start to get to the definition of what the practice of dyanetics actually is; there are people out there who are practising it and hold it as key in changing their lives, and these people seem to be honest and hold kind hearts so there has to be something beyond these initial, confusing chapters.
There was an excellent series of lines in, "The Flight of Dragons," which was concerned at the core thread of the story line, that man was choosing logic over magic and that the world of magic had to use the last of its power to place itself in a protected place away from man, but that it was always needed. The Green Wizard says, "There was a time between the waning age of enchantment and the dawning age of logic, when dragons flew the skies. Free and unencumbered. Look down there Gorbash, at the troubled world below us. All mankind is facing an epic choice, a world of magic or a world of science. Which shall it be?"
Carolinus - "I propose we create the last realm of magic. The magic realm. Where all enchanted things might retreat before their age ends. If we consolidate our powers there will be enough magic left to create such a place. Sealed off from the rest of the world by the mists of invisibility."
Omadon - "You would defeat science and logic with a foolish retirement village?"
Carolinus - "Not defeat, my brother, enhance. The world though it does not realise it, can not do without magic. For example; man hears of the dragons invulnerable skin and lo, he makes armour, battleships, tanks . A fairy flies and furiously jealous man himself defies gravity with machines he will call aeroplanes. A magician looks in to his crystal and sees and hears half way across the world. Ah, says man, if only it could be so; and centuries from now he conjurers up miracles but calls them radio and television. If man is to surmount the insurmountable there must always be magic to inspire him. The world needs magic. Magic can never die."
"Go, and you may never return to the magic realm. For even now the great dome of invisibility grows over our world to protect its sanctity for all time; and no one on the outside may enter its boundaries save for the length of a dream, or flash of an inspiration. But it will stay, through the years the centuries and the ages; a part of man for all time and whenever man needs magic, we will be here."
Contrast this with the line from Dianetics, "It is not a new thought that man is surviving. It is a new thought that man is motivated only by survival." This, I can not agree with. It may be the goal of a few, but not the whole planet. Survival is the continuation of the species. The goal of man is further from this; betterment of itself. Once man has sired the next generation and secured their survival, then what is left? There are those who's goal is greed; the collection and execution of power. There are those with their fingers upon the button of nuclear destruction. These men would think nothing of bringing chaos and death to the human species and the majority of creation and evolution on this planet. No; survival seems to be an afterthought.
To my mind, to ignore the soul in the equation of the human race is to cheapen our very existence.
So it is at this point that I am well out of sympathy with the books unsubstantiated claims. However, I move on.
"Once survival was isolated as the only dynamic of a life form which would explain all its activities, it was necessary to study further the action of survival." "The thrust of survival is away from death and toward immortality." Immortality is a singular; of the individual person and not the species. Survival can be taken as one of two meanings, either of the species of the individual. The title of the chapter is of the species. The two can't cross in this without repercussions in muddying the waters.
This chapter crosses the definitions of the individual and the species so many times that it doesn't make sense.
Next up, The Four Dynamics. Hopefully we'll start to get to the definition of what the practice of dyanetics actually is; there are people out there who are practising it and hold it as key in changing their lives, and these people seem to be honest and hold kind hearts so there has to be something beyond these initial, confusing chapters.
So far
The conclusion of the first two chapters really doesn't amount to much. Considerable anecdotal evidence already exists concerning the state of the human mind and the effect of the soul on the body. The path to happiness is different for various people; if the goal is a happy, fulfilled life then dianetics is not the only system that will achieve this goal.
The goal, a least in the initial stages, is to become clear of all aberrations; overcome all things which cause you problems. It leaves me puzzled as to why all aberrations have to be eliminated; why can they not be comfortably controlled, like someone with a nut allergy who has a solid grip of their situation and doesn't feel suppressed by their situation?
Also, with no guarantee given that a clear will restore full vision, for example, a person with such an impairment will continue to be aberrated and never achieve clear. From what I have read so far, the achievement of clear is difficult to attain and even once achieved can easily be lost; the human condition is a perpetually fluid state.
However, the value to the individual of chasing this state of being can be considered a laudable goal; to want to be a better person is never an achievement that should be looked down on or made little of ... there are too many people in this world who never aspire to anything and will never achieve a smile on their face.
So, wanting to better oneself is a positive step forward; there is enough evidence to suggest a strong link between mental and physical well being and mental health is woefully underestimated in our modern society.
So far there is little in the way of what dianetics actually delivers beyond suggestive links. There is no evidence or reference to, at this point, research other than the socially anecdotal.
As to the effects of psychiatry ... who knows; it has certainly been responsible for some horrific treatments in its youth as it is relatively a very young science, but has transformed itself in the last twenty or thirty years ... now it is effectively a mirror to the soul, allowing the soul to examine and adjust itself. It still has a considerably long way to go and there is doubt as to whether psychiatry can ever achieve anything with the human mind which the mind itself does not want to achieve.
The goal, a least in the initial stages, is to become clear of all aberrations; overcome all things which cause you problems. It leaves me puzzled as to why all aberrations have to be eliminated; why can they not be comfortably controlled, like someone with a nut allergy who has a solid grip of their situation and doesn't feel suppressed by their situation?
Also, with no guarantee given that a clear will restore full vision, for example, a person with such an impairment will continue to be aberrated and never achieve clear. From what I have read so far, the achievement of clear is difficult to attain and even once achieved can easily be lost; the human condition is a perpetually fluid state.
However, the value to the individual of chasing this state of being can be considered a laudable goal; to want to be a better person is never an achievement that should be looked down on or made little of ... there are too many people in this world who never aspire to anything and will never achieve a smile on their face.
So, wanting to better oneself is a positive step forward; there is enough evidence to suggest a strong link between mental and physical well being and mental health is woefully underestimated in our modern society.
So far there is little in the way of what dianetics actually delivers beyond suggestive links. There is no evidence or reference to, at this point, research other than the socially anecdotal.
As to the effects of psychiatry ... who knows; it has certainly been responsible for some horrific treatments in its youth as it is relatively a very young science, but has transformed itself in the last twenty or thirty years ... now it is effectively a mirror to the soul, allowing the soul to examine and adjust itself. It still has a considerably long way to go and there is doubt as to whether psychiatry can ever achieve anything with the human mind which the mind itself does not want to achieve.
The Clear
In reading this chapter, the concept of clear becomes clear, but the purpose remains hidden.
To explain the position; it is maintained that a person suffering the aberration of colour blindness, as example, may be losing their vision of full colour perception not by the physical failure of a receptor component, but by an aberration of the mind or personality which adjusts the signal before it is evaluated by the concious mind.
"Violins play melodies, not monotones, bring no pain and are enjoyed to a fine, full limit if the Clear likes violins as a matter of taste." thus the line is drawn between the personal taste of the clear, or the uncontrolled aberration of the non-clear.
However, the text fails to answer the other side; the clear who's taste is not for the violin might well justifiably perceive the playing of the violin as a monotone which brings pain. There is also no account taken of situations like my own; where colours are more vivid when glasses are worn ... this is clearly a matter of physical issue rather than an aberration of the mind; otherwise the aberration would still be present when the glasses were being worn ... or otherwise my optician did not only examine the optical properties of my eyes during the examination, but also my mental aberrations and fitted allowance for them also in to my prescription. Wow; my optical prescription corrects not only my optical senses, but also my mental aberrations! Cool!
How is any individual to be able to ascertain whether a picture looks dull to them because of either optical dysfunction, mental aberration or personal taste; or even a combination of all three?
At this point, we are thus no further forward on the separation of clear from any of the other two controls (without medical intervention to ascertain the status of the physical.)
There, perhaps, is how we could begin to progress; once medicine has ascertained the physical status then if there is another method of separating personal taste from aberration then the difference between the three states can be ascertained. Yes?
At this point the book concludes, "Thus, the perceptions of an aberee (noncleared individual) vary greatly from those of the cleared (unaberated) individual." while I, personally, can only conclude (at this point in the reading) that without a reliable mechanism for determining whether an affect is down to aberration or personal choice, is one of any number of personal conclusions or beliefs; for without a separation mechanism, there is still no basis in fact for the conclusion. This may be where, "auditing," comes in, but I'm jumping ahead of the book on that point.
I thus read on.
A confusing argument on eyesight ensues, with the account that, "clears," have been known to buy five pairs of spectacles in quick succession after their eyesight naturally returns to near normal vision. What this has to do with being clear or the practice of dianetics, I am not sure. The implication is that the, "clear," mind actually instructs the optics to go against the easy way out; ie. the correction of the glasses. Personally, if I am to direct my eyes, I have to consciously control them and the amount of conscious muscle control I have is actually quite limited. The conclusion, while not outside the bounds of possibility, is nevertheless extremely improbable if it is to happen without intervention of conscious thought or at the least, directed subconscious thought to instruct and re-train the eye muscles.
It is not a hidden situation that glasses are present to correct a situation in the eyes; to relieve the symptoms; they are not a cure. If left to their own devices, the body is capable of resolving its own issues; this is not outside the bounds of expected natural behaviour. There are some conditions like my stigma in each eye, or the onset of occlusion, that I would not expect the body to self correct no matter what I believed; physical intervention would be the only actual cure.
So exactly what the eye and glasses section is doing here, I am not sure. I have definately noted that the wording used here attests to some clears but does not make a blanket statement that all clears will regain near normal sight.
We are still in muddy water territory here. The boldest claim so far is that, "With the removal of aberrations, repeated tests have proven that the body makes a valiant effort to reconstruct back to optimum." However here we have, once again, no actual reference to any research to back up this claim. The best we have is to come back to the anecdotal evidence that the well being of the mind has an effect on the body. There is nothing to align the effects of Dianetics with these processes; happiness and good feeling brought about by any means could thus cause the body to self-correct.
We then progress to the subject of hypnotism and regression. Hubbard writes of hypnotism as if it is a past art. "One upon a time, an art known as hypnotism used what was called 'regression' on hypnotized subjects, the hypnotist sending the subjects back, in one of two ways, to incidents in his past." The writing goes on to state that the clear can effectively regress without the need for hypnosis.
With no reports or accurate events cited, there is, again, nothing to substantiate this. A critical report from people about the techniques employed, throws a shadow over this being possible. From what I have read from various accounts, the processes of auditing, training procedures, etc. have themselves induced mental states the same as, or similar to, hypnosis. This, unfortunately, undermines the written claim.
Further undermining the claim is written on this subject in the book, "Wide awake, he can 'return' to moments in his part. Until asked to do so, he probably will not know he has such an ability. If he had it, he probably thought everybody could do it (the type of supposition which has kept so much of this data from coming to light before.)" which again fails to make the claim that all clears have such recolective abilities' in a world where some people are known to have varying degrees of recall, right through to people with photographic memories, there is still nothing so far which is promoting a clear as having any ability beyond that of the wide range of people in society who have beliefs and abilities at either end of the norm range.
So far, a clear is not coming up to be that special; just an average human being operating within normal parameters.
There is a very obvious example of implication here whilst not making specific claims. To go forward in part of the description of people who are capable of optimum recall, "These people, thinking about a ship, would see a specific ship, feel the motion of her if they thought of being aboard her, smell the pine tar or even less savoury odours and hear whatever sounds there were about her. They would see the ship in full colour motion and hear it in full tone audio.
These faculties vary widely in the aberree. Some when told to think of a rose, can merely visualise one. Some can smell one but not see it."
Very clever writing. It does not state that a clear will attain optimum recall, indeed makes no link between a clear and a person who has optimum recall. However, the described opposite of a clear, an aberree, is stated to have a wide variety of abilities in the faculty of recall. There is thus an implication of where a clear stands in terms of recall by giving a very clever statement where an aberree stands on the situation.
The writing thus describes the abilities of a person with optimum recall without making any link to that person being a clear, a scientologist ... anything. Against this, it is only to be expected that the average person will fall below this level, aberree or dianetics student.
That, by the way, is a conclusion made without resorting to the realm of an individuals strength of imagination. On that subject, however, later on we get a solid statement out of the chapter, "A Clear uses imagination in its entirety." It goes on. "The Clear has full colour-video, tone-sonic, tactile, olfactory, rhythmic, kinesthetic, thermal and organic imagination in kind." It then undoes itself by stating, "But creative imagination, that possession by which works of art are done, states built and man enriched, can be envisioned as a special function, independent in operation and in no way dependent for its existence upon an aberrated condition in the individual, since the examination of its activity in and use by a clear possessing it adequately demonstrates its inherent character. It is rarely absent in any individual."
The most I can draw from this is that a clear has better use of their imagination. There is little reference to the status of imagination in someone who is non-clear, but I do know that the power of my own imagination tends to vary with my mood. It is one of a number of conclusions that a person with a better self-image, no matter how obtained, is more free to indulge in stronger mental impact from their imaginings.
Now we get in to a meatier statement about rationality. "Rationality, as divorced from aberration, can be studied in a cleared person only." There is a following statement which matches this, but is not mentioned. In order to study rationality, the studying person must also be clear of aberration. This opens the whole can of worms. What is the definition of, "normal"?
There is a distinct lack of statements of what a Clear actually is. The reader can only conclude that a clear person is someone who is not aberrated. The chapter makes statements on observed effects of a positive mind on the body but stops short in direct links. Given what has been written about a clear in the past, I was expecting the chapter to say things like, "A clear will be able to remember everything that they see and hear," but it doesn't.
Rather than put everything in the clear, it is full of possibilities, maybees, anecdotal observations and the like. It gave this reader the impression that if I were to work towards becoming clear then there are some ways in which the body and mind might improve itself, but there are no guarantees; meanwhile the aberrated person will definitely not gain from these benefits.
This, I find to be not only wooly, but leaving me with questions; how about the people in hospital who are solid of resolution, good of heart and recover well; about the person who leaves the glasses off and re-trains their eyes ... the vast, vast majority of the people in the world are not clear and these things are happening to them. Although it is possible to take the position that they are unaberrated and just haven't been audited, I think that this, along with many argumentative positions that it is possible to take after reading this chapter, are actually quite unsound.
So, I am left with the conclusion that a clear person is one who is free of aberrations, but not quite so clear on what that benefit brings to the individual.
Next up - The Goal of Man. Feels like million dollar territory.
To explain the position; it is maintained that a person suffering the aberration of colour blindness, as example, may be losing their vision of full colour perception not by the physical failure of a receptor component, but by an aberration of the mind or personality which adjusts the signal before it is evaluated by the concious mind.
"Violins play melodies, not monotones, bring no pain and are enjoyed to a fine, full limit if the Clear likes violins as a matter of taste." thus the line is drawn between the personal taste of the clear, or the uncontrolled aberration of the non-clear.
However, the text fails to answer the other side; the clear who's taste is not for the violin might well justifiably perceive the playing of the violin as a monotone which brings pain. There is also no account taken of situations like my own; where colours are more vivid when glasses are worn ... this is clearly a matter of physical issue rather than an aberration of the mind; otherwise the aberration would still be present when the glasses were being worn ... or otherwise my optician did not only examine the optical properties of my eyes during the examination, but also my mental aberrations and fitted allowance for them also in to my prescription. Wow; my optical prescription corrects not only my optical senses, but also my mental aberrations! Cool!
How is any individual to be able to ascertain whether a picture looks dull to them because of either optical dysfunction, mental aberration or personal taste; or even a combination of all three?
At this point, we are thus no further forward on the separation of clear from any of the other two controls (without medical intervention to ascertain the status of the physical.)
There, perhaps, is how we could begin to progress; once medicine has ascertained the physical status then if there is another method of separating personal taste from aberration then the difference between the three states can be ascertained. Yes?
At this point the book concludes, "Thus, the perceptions of an aberee (noncleared individual) vary greatly from those of the cleared (unaberated) individual." while I, personally, can only conclude (at this point in the reading) that without a reliable mechanism for determining whether an affect is down to aberration or personal choice, is one of any number of personal conclusions or beliefs; for without a separation mechanism, there is still no basis in fact for the conclusion. This may be where, "auditing," comes in, but I'm jumping ahead of the book on that point.
I thus read on.
A confusing argument on eyesight ensues, with the account that, "clears," have been known to buy five pairs of spectacles in quick succession after their eyesight naturally returns to near normal vision. What this has to do with being clear or the practice of dianetics, I am not sure. The implication is that the, "clear," mind actually instructs the optics to go against the easy way out; ie. the correction of the glasses. Personally, if I am to direct my eyes, I have to consciously control them and the amount of conscious muscle control I have is actually quite limited. The conclusion, while not outside the bounds of possibility, is nevertheless extremely improbable if it is to happen without intervention of conscious thought or at the least, directed subconscious thought to instruct and re-train the eye muscles.
It is not a hidden situation that glasses are present to correct a situation in the eyes; to relieve the symptoms; they are not a cure. If left to their own devices, the body is capable of resolving its own issues; this is not outside the bounds of expected natural behaviour. There are some conditions like my stigma in each eye, or the onset of occlusion, that I would not expect the body to self correct no matter what I believed; physical intervention would be the only actual cure.
So exactly what the eye and glasses section is doing here, I am not sure. I have definately noted that the wording used here attests to some clears but does not make a blanket statement that all clears will regain near normal sight.
We are still in muddy water territory here. The boldest claim so far is that, "With the removal of aberrations, repeated tests have proven that the body makes a valiant effort to reconstruct back to optimum." However here we have, once again, no actual reference to any research to back up this claim. The best we have is to come back to the anecdotal evidence that the well being of the mind has an effect on the body. There is nothing to align the effects of Dianetics with these processes; happiness and good feeling brought about by any means could thus cause the body to self-correct.
We then progress to the subject of hypnotism and regression. Hubbard writes of hypnotism as if it is a past art. "One upon a time, an art known as hypnotism used what was called 'regression' on hypnotized subjects, the hypnotist sending the subjects back, in one of two ways, to incidents in his past." The writing goes on to state that the clear can effectively regress without the need for hypnosis.
With no reports or accurate events cited, there is, again, nothing to substantiate this. A critical report from people about the techniques employed, throws a shadow over this being possible. From what I have read from various accounts, the processes of auditing, training procedures, etc. have themselves induced mental states the same as, or similar to, hypnosis. This, unfortunately, undermines the written claim.
Further undermining the claim is written on this subject in the book, "Wide awake, he can 'return' to moments in his part. Until asked to do so, he probably will not know he has such an ability. If he had it, he probably thought everybody could do it (the type of supposition which has kept so much of this data from coming to light before.)" which again fails to make the claim that all clears have such recolective abilities' in a world where some people are known to have varying degrees of recall, right through to people with photographic memories, there is still nothing so far which is promoting a clear as having any ability beyond that of the wide range of people in society who have beliefs and abilities at either end of the norm range.
So far, a clear is not coming up to be that special; just an average human being operating within normal parameters.
There is a very obvious example of implication here whilst not making specific claims. To go forward in part of the description of people who are capable of optimum recall, "These people, thinking about a ship, would see a specific ship, feel the motion of her if they thought of being aboard her, smell the pine tar or even less savoury odours and hear whatever sounds there were about her. They would see the ship in full colour motion and hear it in full tone audio.
These faculties vary widely in the aberree. Some when told to think of a rose, can merely visualise one. Some can smell one but not see it."
Very clever writing. It does not state that a clear will attain optimum recall, indeed makes no link between a clear and a person who has optimum recall. However, the described opposite of a clear, an aberree, is stated to have a wide variety of abilities in the faculty of recall. There is thus an implication of where a clear stands in terms of recall by giving a very clever statement where an aberree stands on the situation.
The writing thus describes the abilities of a person with optimum recall without making any link to that person being a clear, a scientologist ... anything. Against this, it is only to be expected that the average person will fall below this level, aberree or dianetics student.
That, by the way, is a conclusion made without resorting to the realm of an individuals strength of imagination. On that subject, however, later on we get a solid statement out of the chapter, "A Clear uses imagination in its entirety." It goes on. "The Clear has full colour-video, tone-sonic, tactile, olfactory, rhythmic, kinesthetic, thermal and organic imagination in kind." It then undoes itself by stating, "But creative imagination, that possession by which works of art are done, states built and man enriched, can be envisioned as a special function, independent in operation and in no way dependent for its existence upon an aberrated condition in the individual, since the examination of its activity in and use by a clear possessing it adequately demonstrates its inherent character. It is rarely absent in any individual."
The most I can draw from this is that a clear has better use of their imagination. There is little reference to the status of imagination in someone who is non-clear, but I do know that the power of my own imagination tends to vary with my mood. It is one of a number of conclusions that a person with a better self-image, no matter how obtained, is more free to indulge in stronger mental impact from their imaginings.
Now we get in to a meatier statement about rationality. "Rationality, as divorced from aberration, can be studied in a cleared person only." There is a following statement which matches this, but is not mentioned. In order to study rationality, the studying person must also be clear of aberration. This opens the whole can of worms. What is the definition of, "normal"?
There is a distinct lack of statements of what a Clear actually is. The reader can only conclude that a clear person is someone who is not aberrated. The chapter makes statements on observed effects of a positive mind on the body but stops short in direct links. Given what has been written about a clear in the past, I was expecting the chapter to say things like, "A clear will be able to remember everything that they see and hear," but it doesn't.
Rather than put everything in the clear, it is full of possibilities, maybees, anecdotal observations and the like. It gave this reader the impression that if I were to work towards becoming clear then there are some ways in which the body and mind might improve itself, but there are no guarantees; meanwhile the aberrated person will definitely not gain from these benefits.
This, I find to be not only wooly, but leaving me with questions; how about the people in hospital who are solid of resolution, good of heart and recover well; about the person who leaves the glasses off and re-trains their eyes ... the vast, vast majority of the people in the world are not clear and these things are happening to them. Although it is possible to take the position that they are unaberrated and just haven't been audited, I think that this, along with many argumentative positions that it is possible to take after reading this chapter, are actually quite unsound.
So, I am left with the conclusion that a clear person is one who is free of aberrations, but not quite so clear on what that benefit brings to the individual.
Next up - The Goal of Man. Feels like million dollar territory.
The Scope of Dianetics
The opening chapter lays the groundwork for what is to come.
The human race has looked for answers as to what the mind is, what the human is, but I would disagree with the degree that the book lays this down; "No quest has been more relentlessly pursued or has been more violent. No primitive tribe, no matter how ignorant, has failed to recognise the problem as a problem, nor has it failed to bring forth at least an attempted formulation." stating that armies and civilizations have perished for the lack of a, "science of mind." This, I can not accept. The human race looking for answers, yes. As to the perishing of civilisations, I would put that down to religious wars and human greed rather than a concious want of understanding of the self. Any attempt to put it down to an, "unconscious," want is, in my humble opinion, an argument that is on shaky ground. Survival seems to be the strongest and most common thread behind the human psyche, with a sense of self coming after the most critical needs of food in the stomach, a roof over the head and a warm fire have been secured.
The chapter takes issue firmly with the psychiatric treatment of old; techniques that were stopped a few decades ago like electric shock treatment and frontal lobotomies. I remember beginning some of my own counselling in the late 1980s, the building bore the scars of heavy duty electrical cabling, not that long removed. I know of people who were treated with electric shock therapy; it didn't work. Psychiatry has moved on but L Ron Hubbard died in 1986 and psychiatry no longer uses the techniques rightfully highlighted as barbaric in this chapter. To hold a valid stance now, Dianetics would have to re-evaluate modern psychiatry but I believe it is correct in the application of lobotomies and electric shock as being barbaric at the time. There is discussion about the, "crimes," of psychiatry and that is a deeper issue; certainly psychiatry is not without blood on its hands but each, "crime," would have to be investigated and as I have already highlighted, the organisations own word on what psychiatry did, holds little weight these days. Only facts can sort that issue out.
The science of the mind is therefore to deal with the person, the soul. It bears no link, according to this chapter, with the physical body. It lists, "The cause and cure of all psychosomatic ills, which number, some say, 70 percent of man's listed ailments." however there is no reference as to who the, "some say," are or any texts as to where this percentage actually comes from.
There is some anecdotal evidence that the state of the mind can affect the state of the body; commonly observed with people in hospital who have lost the will to live. I can accept this to a point. I have been close enough to various people to have knowledge of some fairly odd things, like a good friend of mine, who's word I trust; accounting one of his childhood playmates making the statement, in their teens, that he would be dead before he was fifty. Indeed, at the age of 49, in hospital, suffering from osteoporosis, that person never did see their fiftieth birthday. The question is validly asked, did the mind have thirty plus years knowledge of when the body would fail, or did the strength of the mind cause the bodies failure? A question to which we will never know the answer. We will never actually know whether osteoporosis was actually diagnosed as a child and an accurate of estimated life span given. We can postulate all we wish, but like the existence of God, we will never know the answer for a full, outright fact and it is things like this which do not help in clearing the waters of understanding.
The chapter ends with some fairly strong claims, the very mention of them leaves me with sincere doubts, that scientology helps various forms of human study and the field of cytology is specifically mentioned.
So, here we are with a repeat of my previous reading; statements which have no external references to back up the claims made; the reader being expected to accept them as fact. This is immediately not registering as a very scientific work.
I interpret what I have read so far as being that dianetics aims to bring self-understanding to the mind and, by that knowledge, better self control and access to the minds own abilities and freedom from becoming caught up in situations which are of the minds own making. If I remember of what is to come further in the book, the issue of two people talking through a persons troubles may actually be close to modern psychiatry ... I dare say I will find out in time.
As of yet, I see nothing which purports to deal with the health of the physical body, so that puts one anti-scientology claim on the sidelines; but only for the time being as the next chapter is on the Clear and will answer a number of arguments as to what benefits being, "clear," should bring to a persons life. This, I feel, will be a critical chapter.
The human race has looked for answers as to what the mind is, what the human is, but I would disagree with the degree that the book lays this down; "No quest has been more relentlessly pursued or has been more violent. No primitive tribe, no matter how ignorant, has failed to recognise the problem as a problem, nor has it failed to bring forth at least an attempted formulation." stating that armies and civilizations have perished for the lack of a, "science of mind." This, I can not accept. The human race looking for answers, yes. As to the perishing of civilisations, I would put that down to religious wars and human greed rather than a concious want of understanding of the self. Any attempt to put it down to an, "unconscious," want is, in my humble opinion, an argument that is on shaky ground. Survival seems to be the strongest and most common thread behind the human psyche, with a sense of self coming after the most critical needs of food in the stomach, a roof over the head and a warm fire have been secured.
The chapter takes issue firmly with the psychiatric treatment of old; techniques that were stopped a few decades ago like electric shock treatment and frontal lobotomies. I remember beginning some of my own counselling in the late 1980s, the building bore the scars of heavy duty electrical cabling, not that long removed. I know of people who were treated with electric shock therapy; it didn't work. Psychiatry has moved on but L Ron Hubbard died in 1986 and psychiatry no longer uses the techniques rightfully highlighted as barbaric in this chapter. To hold a valid stance now, Dianetics would have to re-evaluate modern psychiatry but I believe it is correct in the application of lobotomies and electric shock as being barbaric at the time. There is discussion about the, "crimes," of psychiatry and that is a deeper issue; certainly psychiatry is not without blood on its hands but each, "crime," would have to be investigated and as I have already highlighted, the organisations own word on what psychiatry did, holds little weight these days. Only facts can sort that issue out.
The science of the mind is therefore to deal with the person, the soul. It bears no link, according to this chapter, with the physical body. It lists, "The cause and cure of all psychosomatic ills, which number, some say, 70 percent of man's listed ailments." however there is no reference as to who the, "some say," are or any texts as to where this percentage actually comes from.
There is some anecdotal evidence that the state of the mind can affect the state of the body; commonly observed with people in hospital who have lost the will to live. I can accept this to a point. I have been close enough to various people to have knowledge of some fairly odd things, like a good friend of mine, who's word I trust; accounting one of his childhood playmates making the statement, in their teens, that he would be dead before he was fifty. Indeed, at the age of 49, in hospital, suffering from osteoporosis, that person never did see their fiftieth birthday. The question is validly asked, did the mind have thirty plus years knowledge of when the body would fail, or did the strength of the mind cause the bodies failure? A question to which we will never know the answer. We will never actually know whether osteoporosis was actually diagnosed as a child and an accurate of estimated life span given. We can postulate all we wish, but like the existence of God, we will never know the answer for a full, outright fact and it is things like this which do not help in clearing the waters of understanding.
The chapter ends with some fairly strong claims, the very mention of them leaves me with sincere doubts, that scientology helps various forms of human study and the field of cytology is specifically mentioned.
So, here we are with a repeat of my previous reading; statements which have no external references to back up the claims made; the reader being expected to accept them as fact. This is immediately not registering as a very scientific work.
I interpret what I have read so far as being that dianetics aims to bring self-understanding to the mind and, by that knowledge, better self control and access to the minds own abilities and freedom from becoming caught up in situations which are of the minds own making. If I remember of what is to come further in the book, the issue of two people talking through a persons troubles may actually be close to modern psychiatry ... I dare say I will find out in time.
As of yet, I see nothing which purports to deal with the health of the physical body, so that puts one anti-scientology claim on the sidelines; but only for the time being as the next chapter is on the Clear and will answer a number of arguments as to what benefits being, "clear," should bring to a persons life. This, I feel, will be a critical chapter.
What am I expecting?
The start of Dianetics highlights the human cause for greater understanding of itself. That, I believe, is likely a part in why people come to Scientology, for answers of the soul which do not require a person to hand over blind faith. Self betterment and solutions to a variety of emotional problems and situations seem to be the leading force in people coming to this path.
Much has been said about the bridge to total freedom, attaining the state of, "clear," and the various benefits that this state is said to bring. Running on other peoples statements on all sides of discussions on this, I have only one course of action to get to the truth ... investigation.
So I am not sure what I am expecting. I am hoping to clear the air of the claims and counter claims; to come to my own conclusions regarding the Tech, what it teaches and what is gained. This book, I have, and someone in the Free Zone has guided me to "Self Analysis: A Simple Self-Help Volume of Tests and Processes Based on the Discoveries Contained in Dianetics" which cost the best part of £20. Time will tell if it is worth the money.
Much has been said about the bridge to total freedom, attaining the state of, "clear," and the various benefits that this state is said to bring. Running on other peoples statements on all sides of discussions on this, I have only one course of action to get to the truth ... investigation.
So I am not sure what I am expecting. I am hoping to clear the air of the claims and counter claims; to come to my own conclusions regarding the Tech, what it teaches and what is gained. This book, I have, and someone in the Free Zone has guided me to "Self Analysis: A Simple Self-Help Volume of Tests and Processes Based on the Discoveries Contained in Dianetics" which cost the best part of £20. Time will tell if it is worth the money.
What's going on here?
This will be a slow journey. Don't expect anything to happen quickly here.
As an individual I've had my own issues and been on a course of self discovery. I've done more than my fair share of personality tests, sat with counsellors, psychiatrists and other things. Scientology is just another tool on the list of targets.
Much has been said for and against it and although I have previously picked up, "Dianetics," it is time for me to try again.
At one point, there was only one organisation. The Church of Scientology. In a game of words, it has finally lost. When the organisations spokes-person has been on record, on television, as denying the existence of Xenu while audio tapes of L.Ron Hubbard exist to the opposite effect, then that organisation has taken a massive hit on its credibility. Its words have to be treated as considerably degraded.
Something can not be both church and science. From my standpoint I have to disregard the church and religion aspect of this study. There is no deity and no worship. It therefore comes down to a science at best, at least a study and application of a methodology.
With people in the Free Zone who are practising what is known as, "The Tech," outside what was started as the official organisation, then it is possible to progress the path and examine the system; see if it does stand up to examination and whether it does deliver what are known simply as, "gains."
Lets get one thing clear; I'm not about to invest serious money in this. I haven't got three thousand dollars to invest in a set of books. I'm going as far as I can on whatever materials are available second hand ... I haven't actually got that much money to speak of and I am not giving up my job. If, at any point on this journey, these barriers are reached, then the journey stops there.
The purpose of going on this journey is for my betterment, not the destruction of either my soul, my bank balance or the roof over my head.
It starts with a battered, second hand copy of Dianetics. Using this, I start on the journey in to Hubbards Technology of the mind and soul.
As an individual I've had my own issues and been on a course of self discovery. I've done more than my fair share of personality tests, sat with counsellors, psychiatrists and other things. Scientology is just another tool on the list of targets.
Much has been said for and against it and although I have previously picked up, "Dianetics," it is time for me to try again.
At one point, there was only one organisation. The Church of Scientology. In a game of words, it has finally lost. When the organisations spokes-person has been on record, on television, as denying the existence of Xenu while audio tapes of L.Ron Hubbard exist to the opposite effect, then that organisation has taken a massive hit on its credibility. Its words have to be treated as considerably degraded.
Something can not be both church and science. From my standpoint I have to disregard the church and religion aspect of this study. There is no deity and no worship. It therefore comes down to a science at best, at least a study and application of a methodology.
With people in the Free Zone who are practising what is known as, "The Tech," outside what was started as the official organisation, then it is possible to progress the path and examine the system; see if it does stand up to examination and whether it does deliver what are known simply as, "gains."
Lets get one thing clear; I'm not about to invest serious money in this. I haven't got three thousand dollars to invest in a set of books. I'm going as far as I can on whatever materials are available second hand ... I haven't actually got that much money to speak of and I am not giving up my job. If, at any point on this journey, these barriers are reached, then the journey stops there.
The purpose of going on this journey is for my betterment, not the destruction of either my soul, my bank balance or the roof over my head.
It starts with a battered, second hand copy of Dianetics. Using this, I start on the journey in to Hubbards Technology of the mind and soul.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)