In 1950 I was looking for group auditing because I was well aware of the fact that groups could get an engram, mutual. And group auditing has been experimented with and worked with from time to time, even on a continental level, in an effort to do something about this. And what do you know, we finally have found what it is. It’s a wrong why that causes a group engram. And to de-engramize a group, all you have to do is do a complete, competent evaluation and find the right why and handle it correctly, and the group will dis-emote. This is quite remarkable. In other words, data analysis is third dynamic de-aberration and is as remarkable a technology as running engrams on the individual case. Interesting. The right why, the right why.1 So therefore, the aberrations of the planet are simply built on the wrong whys of yesteryear.
I’ll give you the most flagrant example of this in modern times that has any relationship to our field or activity. Psychiatry operates on a wrong why, and it gets itself into miserable trouble, and has miserable programs which are terribly unpopular. It thinks there’s a thing called mental disease and that that disease is a physiological thing. And Kreplin’s chart, the largest chart, I have a copy of it here, gives all the diseases. It’s only on a little section of the last page that they say that something might be caused by purely environmental stresses. The rest of it is all physiological, insanity is physiological, schizophrenia is physiological, paranoia is physiological. It’s because the guy hasn’t eaten the right brand of beans or something of the sort, and they dabble around with this. Freud’s breakthrough was that it might have something to do with mental, but psychiatry at large has never really admitted to itself that this is the case. So they have this thing called mental health. What the hell is this thing? Szaz, Dr. Thomas Szaz, exposes this in a very scholarly way in a terrifically well annotated, and cross-indexed and so on, set of books. He’s a marvel, he’s a psychiatrist, he does not believe in institutional psychiatry. And this is actually what it is.
And so therefore, they let the medical doctor into the mental field. And how did he get there? He got there about four and a half hundred years ago by saying that witches were actually possessed or not, whether it was physical or produced by demonic possession or spells.
And the medical doctor, from that period to this, has been the hidden factor back of psychiatry. Four and a half hundred years ago they called in the MD to find out whether or not the guy was physically ill or whether or not he was obsessed by demons. And if the medical doctor said he is physically ill, they treated him; and if he said he wasn’t really physically ill, they tortured the guy on the rack and burned him at the stake. And that’s been going on for four and a half hundred years and hasn’t stopped yet, and that’s basic psychiatric law.
”The Manufacture of Madness”, a whole book devoted by Szaz to this subject, and at first you believe this is just a gag, but no, the references are total. They were operating on a wrong why. There is no such thing as physical mental disease, and yet in every university the Psychology Department teaches people that they think with their brains. I was busy running this out the other day as a long series of locks, and you never saw anything so funny in your life. You keep blaming the prefrontal lobes and it makes them kind of hurt. All they are is just some meat. People have been told this so often that they become suspicious of this area of the body. Now, it is true in paresis, which is syphilis in its advanced stages, why, people get some weird states; they do, they get very weird states; but then perhaps it would just be the hiddeness of a disease and the cut off of any future procreation that would produce a mental response such as you get with that. There is no evidence of any kind whatsoever that there is anything called a mental disease. So therefore, the whole of psychiatry is based on a wrong why, and the whole of civilization for four and a half hundred years has been tossed into dungeons, and tortured and burned at the stake, and electric shocked and pre-frontal lobotomied and put in ice packs and everything else. Wrong why.
Now, we come along and we find the right why, we find the right why, we find the remedies of this sort of thing. The fact that somebody might actually get cured and that they might be wrong is really what drove psychiatry down the spout, it wasn’t really our publicity. They were so fixated on the fact that if we got loose with this idea, and they knew very well that we produced results and they didn’t, they knew that well. The only thing for which one can’t quite forgive them, they knew Scientology worked, they knew, they knew Dianetics worked, so that made their whole theory wrong and it drove them around the bend. We had another theory, it worked. They were operating with this other theory, it didn’t work. So, they ceased to be able to broadcast with sincerity from their top echelon because somebody could catch them out, somebody had missed the withhold. They knew psychiatry didn’t work. Somebody missed the withhold2. That’s what’s taken them down the drain.3
I’d like to tell you today, here at this first lecture, I’d like to tell you something of the story of Dianetics and Scientology. Some things I’ve never confided to anyone before.
Would you like to hear that?
Well, the start of this story is probably a long, long time ago. And those who don’t believe in past lives will not be offended, because we won’t go that far back. We’ll just take this lifetime.
The story actually starts back when I was about twelve years old and I met one of the great men of Freudian analysis – a Commander Thompson. He was a very great man, an explorer And it’s very fit that we mention his name here in this particular hall, because after all, all the great explorers of Great Britain more or less are haloed here.
And this man was responsible for a great many discoveries out through the world, but he was also interested in the human mind, and his name, as I said, was Thompson. He was a commander in the United States Navy and his enemies all called him Crazy Thompson and his friends called him Snake Thompson.
He was a very careless man. He used to go to sleep reading a book and when he woke up, why, he got up and never bothered to press and change his uniform, you know.
And he was usually in very bad odor with the Navy Department. He was rather looked down on. But he was a personal friend of Sigmund Freud’s. He had no boys of his own, and when he saw me – a defenseless character – and there was nothing to do on a big transport on a very long cruise, he started to work me over.
What impressed me: He had a cat by the name of Psycho. This cat had a crooked tail, which is enough to impress any young man. And the cat would do tricks. And the first thing he did to me was teach me how to train cats. But it takes so long, and it requires such tremendous patience that to this day I have never trained a cat. You have to wait, evidently, for the cat to do something, then you applaud it. But waiting for a cat to do something whose name is Psycho ….
Anyway; at the Library of Congress in Washington, DC, where they have all the books on everything, he started shoving my nose into an education in the field of the mind. Now, that’s a very unusual thing to do, to take a twelve-year-old boy and start doing something with the mind. But he really got me interested in the subject – up to the point where I was pretty sure that Freud didn’t know what he was talking about.
But actually Commander Thompson had a very open mind on this, and he used to tell me, “Well, if it’s not true for you, it’s not true.” And I found out that he got this from a fellow named Gautama Siddhartha. Now, you really don’t know Gautama Siddhartha as a man (but that’s all he was) because better than two-thirds of the world population now considers him, a god. But the first thing that Gautama Siddhartha ever said about his own work was that he was just a man. This he tried to make very plain. And the other lesson, back there about 600 B.C., that he taught everyone is that if it isn’t true for you, it isn’t true. It was probably the first time that statement was ever made in this rather didactic universe. I find it’s a very good statement. It agreed with my own personal philosophy very well, because if there’s anybody in the world that’s calculated to believe what he wants to believe and to reject what he doesn’t want to believe, it is I.
But on this very impressionable background I found, at least, that somebody had a hope that something could be done in the field of the human mind. And I think that was Freud’s great contribution – that something could be done about the mind, Now, that doesn’t mean – that doesn’t mean, of course, absolutely and accurately that something will be done about the mind. It just means that there’s a hope that something could be done, and I believe Freud really deserves a great niche in history just for that all by itself. Regardless of what he thought could be done with the mind or how he thought it could be done, he was really the first man that ever stood up and said there was hope for it without whips, clubs, straitjackets and the rest of the paraphernalia by which certain strata of this universe attempt to (quote) cure (unquote) insanity.1
- Hubbard, L. R. (1958, 18 October). Story of Dianetics and Scientology. London Clearing Congress, (LCC-01). Lecture conducted from London. ↩
Besides having a couple of other things to do in the last eight years, I have been in search of an open channel for Dianetics and Scientology which would not run into large obstacles and which would thereby make it possible for organizations and auditors to outflow what we know to a maximum with a minimum of difficulty.
When you have to qualify and explain what you are doing continually, you have only in that an obstacle. Since there was no immediate forebear to Dianetics and Scientology, there was no cut groove in the society. Thus we have had to keep company with subjects in the public mind as rag-tag as anything can get –i.e., psychology, psychiatry. And of all the drooling idiots I would never choose for bedfellows, believe me, the psychologist and psychiatrist would be below my lowest list. Why? Because they’re fakes. They come from a long line of hoodwinks including such nobles as the priests of Ra, Cagliostro and Wundt. Why? Because they would take the pennies off a dead man’s eyes. Why? Because there are limits where a gentleman stops and the old-time hocus-pocus of the mind just then began.
Naturally, then, we ourselves would get a slap from the same dank brush. One of the principal “everybody knows” is “everybody knows psychology and psychiatry are phoney.” Now it is an oddity that if you accuse a man long enough of being a fake or a robber or a bum he tends to believe he might be one.
Ninety percent of the few auditors who have quit have all suffered from this association with psychologists and psychiatrists to a point where they themselves thought they were phonies –and that therefore the organization and all connected with it must then be phonies.
The Open Channel for which I have searched has been found. I went over to Dublin, a poor, cross-ridden town, and started up a pilot operation. Were the American College duplicated in London and Washington it would start making history fast. Why? Because it exploits an open channel which runs, like good roads and good weather (of which everyone is in favor), without opposition.
Behold: “Scientology is that branch of psychology which treats of human ability. Old-time Wundtian psychology said that people could not change. Now that we can change people we have to call what we are doing something else than psychology.” They “know” what psychology is (familiar word). They immediately grasp this, get a tiny agreement. Then they are told (gradient scale) that old-time psychology couldn’t change people (which they can verify in psychology texts) and that we can. Follow this with a discussion of IQ and Personality Tests and then brush aside any thought of neurosis or psychosis as part of the picture with “Well, I think we can all agree that any of us have room for improvement,” and you’re off into something the person you are talking to can use. IF YOU CAN SELL ONE PERSON PAINLESSLY ON SCIENTOLOGY YOU CAN SELL GROUPS. IF YOU CAN SELL GROUPS YOU CAN SELL THE WORLD.
I am often amused when somebody shifts one of my mock-ups around –for they very often do it on the basis of removing the motor. Washington recently published the above definition of Scientology with a subtle change: “Scientology is that branch of wisdom which treats of human ability.” They changed the one thing vital in the sentence. The listener is going to classify YOU as a psychologist. He’s read about psychology in the comic strips. He uses the word–constantly. It’s an agreement point. You avoid the word entirely as did Washington and you have (1) missed the agreement point and (2) invited him to retain an association not as-ised which will condemn you. So changing one of these mock-ups around may make them non-workus-deadus.
No, you say to anybody, “I’m a Scientologist.” “Scientology? It is that branch of psychology which treats of human ability. Old-time psychology believed you couldn’t change anyone’s intelligence or personality, so when we could we had to call it something else.” “Well, I think you’ll agree that anyone could stand some improvement.” “It’s fascinating that even morons can be made smart.” “You know, an average intelligence is about 108. Well, with a little work a Scientologist can shift that to 120 or 130, you know, make it possible for the person to tackle jobs he couldn’t have understood before.” “All we’re interested in is increasing business efficiency. Has a lot to do with income. Fellow with an IQ of 108 makes, let’s say, $35 a week. He’d be paid more if he was worth it. We raise his IQ to 120 and his pay goes up to $75.” “You know, we don’t need new business ideas or gimmicks. All we need is some people who can carry on existing business efficiently for a change.” “Take government. I don’t think a lot of people in government are smart enough to understand their business.” “I’d sure like to get my hands on some of these officials. . . .”
That’s all agreement chatter. It’s material which keeps your listener coming. HE knows (and you never infer it) that HE could use this stuff Scientology personally. He’d resent being told he needed psychiatry or psychology, for that would infer he was crazy. But when you talk about IQ and rising pay and how stupid people can get businesses in trouble, you’re right in there on the agreement level. Now if you AVOID psychology entirely, you leave it to the listener to infer it and thereafter you’re a psychologist to him.
I wrote the above, not off the cuff, but straight out of experiences other people and myself have had with it. There’s no counter-effort. All’s well. What you say goes home. So without altering this carefully built mock-up, try it out.
There is something else you can do. You can arrange with a loan company to lend the person enough to pay for a medical checkup by an MD with which you’ve made an arrangement, for their course and for individual auditing. The loan company pays you in cash. The student-pc pays the loan company by the week from his paycheck. This of course has to be carefully greased and made painless. But as the sum is small and as the people who come to you get salaries, you will find a loan company will be very happy to play ball.
The end product we already know is a working person with a higher IQ and with poise the like of which employers haven’t seen lately. Teaching, getting the confusion out of them, always can be counted upon to up their confidence and poise. And you’ll have Scientologists.
Now there are additional services you can offer if you can deliver them. You can test for IQ and personality and write a letter to their boss about their improvement at course end. You will wind up with a huge employment roster. You can work with employment offices. (Don’t be an employment office, work WITH all other employment offices. Be an employment wholesaler to employment agencies for a fee, never a retailer, as that’s a profession in itself.)
Here’s an OPEN CHANNEL in the society. Nobody is really doing it. Not even Carnegie, the closest reach, did this. Nobody balks good roads, good weather or better business efficiency today. And you can let the psychologist and pseudo-psychologist stew in their own rather rancid juices and gibber around their shock machines and mice in their government-financed prisons and go straight to hell, whither they are bound, without our knowing or caring.
Are you going to help reach on this OPEN CHANNEL? You know you are.
Problems and other plans were good. But they aren’t as good as this one. Try it out.1