Русская версия

Search document title:
Content search 2 (exact):
ENGLISH DOCS FOR THIS DATE- Creative Processing Steps (AC-09) - L571231c | Сравнить
- National Academy of American Psychology (AC-08) - L571231b | Сравнить
- Responsibility (AC-07) - L571231a | Сравнить

RUSSIAN DOCS FOR THIS DATE- Национальная Академия Американской Психологии (КСп 57) - Л571231 | Сравнить
- Ответственность - как Создать Третью Динамику (КСп 57) - Л571231 | Сравнить
- Шаги Процессинга Создания (КСп 57) - Л571231 | Сравнить

CONTENTS THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGY Cохранить документ себе Скачать
Ability Congress 07Ability Congress 07
7th lecture at the "Ability Congress" held in Washington, DC8th lecture at the "Ability Congress" held in Washington, DC

RESPONSIBILITY – HOW TO CREATE A THIRD DYNAMIC

THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGY

A lecture given on 31 December 1957A lecture given on 31 December 1957
[Clearsound transcript checked against the old reels. Material on the reels that was omitted in the clearsound version is marked "&”][Based on the Clearsound Version only.]

How are you today?

We can relax and just coast here. There's not very much going to happen between now and the end of the congress.

Audience: Fine.

Not very much.

Did you survive?

I have the pleasure at the moment of announcing to you pursuant to my last lecture concerning responsibility, a new organization.

Audience: Yes.

We have undoubtedly founded here the first American school of mental practice and understanding. And if we do less than take full responsibility for mental practice in the United States we would be very foolish.

You survived your morning's auditing?

The last time I looked it was still our country. Maybe the next time I look that will not be true – that will not be true. But nevertheless it still is.

Audience: Yes.

And therefore I don't see any reason why an American school should be lambasted and slam-banged and fooled with, reviled in its own country unless it is true that America kills all those who try to help her. If that's true then there is no hope for it.

Well good. Now I hope that – I hope you are all in very good shape. However, if you aren't we have a 12 ½ -hour intensive just for those who collapsed or did something here in this Group Processing.

Just why we have had a bad seven years is because the field of mental practice itself is bad beyond bad. Extremely bad. I'm not telling you now that it's all bad over there. I am simply telling you that the world of psychology, psychiatry and psychoanalysis has erred sweepingly! And that all mental practice today should be in worse repute than it is.

& And if you see Mary Sue why I'm sure she'd do something for you.

Two thousand dead men per year, two thousand dead men per year – under electric shock. Thousands more dead with brain surgery. People whose lives are being wrecked, men whose lives are being ended by suicide, all because of thoroughly bad mental practice in the United States. The United States up to this time has imported nearly all of its mental practice from Russia, and from Germany.

But the point is that you were using very mild processes but they are quite effective – quite effective.

Now, a lot of you people don't believe me when I tell you that psychology in the United States was founded by Professor Wundt of Leipzig, Germany in 1879. Of course, Columbia University teaches psychology, doesn't it? And it's an American school, isn't it? They teach the work of Professor Wundt, Leipzig, Germany, 1879, a pal of Karl Marx.

The trouble with Scientology today is the mildest we have makes an atom bomb look like a faint Chinese ladyfinger firecracker, you know go pfsst. That's for true. A lot of people think their case needs dynamite, you know, they think their case should be exploded or something of the sort. They have that feeling. They say "In order to get into good shape, why I'd practically have to blow up!" That's right.

Listen, it isn't "psychology." The word "psyche" means spirit, and "ology" or "logos" means study or knowledge.

& As the first thing that I'd like to do today, I'd like to introduce to you the staff of the Central Organization in Washington, D.C. And first of course, your congress manager and the Organization Secretary, Dr. Vic Dean. And this young lady you know, this is Mary Sue Hubbard. And this is HCO Secretary, Millie Dean. She's going to play the organ to get you out of here when the congress is over. You have to be versatile to be an HCO Secretary, she says. And this is Jackie St. Ann, Comm Course instructor. How are you Jackie? And this is Smokey Bland. Smokey here is a staff auditor, and he's the boy that built this with some help from some others, but he built this crook neck that you saw the first day. And he had to come out and pilot it himself, so's you better not be building rockets. Thank you. And this is Judy Breeding. And this is Dick Halpern. And this is Dr. Jan Halpern.

What does the anatomy of the brain have to do with "psyche"? Nothing! We practice in the field of "psychophysics." It's a word you will find in the dictionary. It is the inter-influence between mind and matter, or spirit and matter more properly. "Psychophysics" the interrelationship between spirit and matter.

& Now any of you that are smart enough or luckless enough to be part of the nineteenth ACC will be totally mislead. You think this little, white hand here is little and white. Wait 'til you feel it on the back of your neck when you do wrong. Thank you.

Now psychology is understood to be something between the brain and the body today, and that is a complete misnomer, and the moment we swing this thing back what do we find lying before us? We find a vista of abuse, of lies, of a country's morale being caved-in, of the most villainous activities man ever invented being garbed with the respectability of degrees and universities and so on.

& And this is Dr. Glen Elliot. And this is Bonnie Turner, HCO. And this is Gordon Bell. Thank you Gordon. And this is Jack Horner. Hi Jack.

We have this constant statement held up to us that IQ cannot be changed. That is taught in the universities of America! That personality cannot in any way be altered. Now, wait a minute, wait a minute, if that is true, why are they operating? Look, if man can't be changed what are they doing?

& From Audience: Hi!

Should there be any respectability at all to this then? They must be studying in a total defeatism, but what are they studying and why are they studying it if there is nothing can be done about it? And yet nobody seems to have asked that sensible question.

& This is Phil Talent. And he's the reason you've been getting all of your books on time lately. Thank you. And this is Eleanor Eddy. Thank you. There's Mr. Slaughter, who does a good job for us. And this is Al Cozak.

So today we have asked it with the formation and foundation of the National Academy of American Psychology, lately formed in Washington, DC, chartered by the District of Columbia and officered by people who know what they are doing.

& Now those of you that are lucky enough at this season of the year to be living in Florida will probably be seeing a lot of Al. Is that right, that you're taking over that territory?

Now, why should we go ahead and do this? It is not that Scientology becomes psychology, but that the field and practice of psychology, the field and practice of psychiatry, the field and practice of psychoanalysis have thrown into disrepute mental practice in the United States to such a degree that we have a difficult time going forward.

& From Audience: That's possible, yes.

If you were in an automobile and you find a tree blown down across the road, let me assure you the sensible thing to do is to remove the tree. And we, as we go down the road, discover that a tree lies across our track and that tree is all the mistakes that have been made, all of the people who've been disillusioned, all of the students who have been brought into universities and taught psychology, which mainly was name the parts of the brain. The parts of the brain? What does this have to do with psychology?

& Yeah, well he's taken over that territory, so you've got it made. OK.

Now, it's a materialistic study a hundred percent and I am not going to give you a lecture on the length and breadth of psychology. I ask you to get a standard text on the line and read it for a change! Read it. And if you find anything in it that will help you help your fellow man, I will pay you a thousand dollars cash! It says apathy-apathy-apathy- apathy-apathy.

& And this Larry Michele, staff auditor. And this is Kathy Talent, who does a good job on staff auditing. And this is Gene Townley on staff as auditor. And this is Dr. John Galusha, who has been around. He's very suspicious. He doesn't know quite what I'm going to say now. He's been around probably longest of any staff, and he came back to us. He's now Director of Training, and doing a terrific job. Thank you John.

Psychology cannot be defined because it is – used to be that "psyche" meant spirit; it doesn't mean spirit today – and it used to mean mind, but it doesn't mean mind today, and it doesn't study because it – didn't but it's all – ... You have to know its history in order to know what it means. W L. Mann, a paraphrase of his opening paragraphs.

& And this is Rosina Mann, formerly; used to be on London staff, and she was so good that we borrowed her and got her over here. And this is May Garringer. And this is Barney Bossick. Bill Lawrence. I'll show you how big this organization is. This boy's been on staff and working hard, organizing Washington here for weeks, and I can't tell the difference between him and Gordon Bell. They've gotten in each other's valence on this one project. Thank you.

What a fascinating – what a fascinating series of buffooneries. And we're expected to kowtow to and obey the laws laid down by these fakers! And I won't do it anymore! Scare ya?

& And this gentleman is one of our newer staff members. He's been into more mischief lately. There are more people, there are more people in the opposition who wishes he weren't around, but we're glad he's around. This is Dr. Ken Barrett.

It is time that America cleaned up its psychology, psychiatry and psycho-analysis; it's time it cleaned it up, so therefore I have taken the occasion of its filthiness to write a loyalty oath which they better sign or else.

& And this is my daughter, Kay Hubbard. And this is a gentleman who takes care of press, Paul Twitchell. And this is Johann Templehouse. Most of those PAB books back there were edited by Johann, and there's several other books and a couple of new ones there. They've all seen his light touch, and also a lot of your PABs are edited by him. So if you can read what I say, Johann is to blame. Thank you.

The NAAP is totally devoted to just this, a clean-up. It isn't going to train anybody; it isn't going to do anything for anybody, beyond try to assure the public of good practice in the field of mental practice; that is all it is going to do, like the Good Housekeeping Institute. Do you get the idea?

& And this is Marilyn Rootsong.

Now if you think that it has anything else in mind, why just banish it because it doesn't. Has nothing else in mind but the cleanup of psychiatry, psychology and psychoanalysis. And that is all it's got in mind.

& Do you know who he is?

Its existence does not make you a psychologist. Membership in it does not make you a psychologist – you are still a Scientologist even if you are a member of it. Do you understand? Anybody can be a member of it and it doesn't cost a dime. It costs nothing to be a member of it at all.

& Audience: No.

All right, I wrote up here a loyalty oath of mental practice. Now, why did I say a "loyalty oath of mental practice?" That's because Euro-Russian psychology is the only psychology taught in the United States today in these great institutions that are turning out all these scientists that are not firing off Vanguards properly.

& No. Burt Belnap. And right now the tape recorders are probably grinding, grinding, grinding into dust without any attention, 'cause this is Don Breeding. Now Don is not our electronic man, he's a staff auditor. He's just a volunteer on electronics now.

Now, if these are foreign philosophies, they possibly could be used to no good. Remember these are the philosophies that gave Germany into the hands of Hitler, that gave Russia into the hands of Stalin. These same philosophies spread about gave Italy into the hands of Mussolini; these are the philosophies that started totalitarian states, and are directly responsible for the death of 30 million people in the last two decades! Don't think that they don't have a lot of arsenic slid in along with them. You couldn't overstate the case against them.

& We actually got him out of electronics. Thank you.

But there is no reason why they cannot practice ethically if they must practice at all.

& And last, and very far from least, this is Nibs, my son. Thank you. Thank you very much. Got quite a staff, haven't we? That's quite a staff.

And when we read in See magazine, and Changing Times and old issues of Coronets about these "quack Scientologists." If you think I am going to take this laying down and without manning a few machine guns, you have overlooked the fact that I am used to manning machine guns. Now, if I say that we should clean up mental practice in the United States, it is only pursuant to taking some responsibility for our own field. And as long as we sit back and say, "Well, we are just ourselves, us poor little organization with everybody against us" we will never get anywhere. It is time that we took responsibility across the field of mental practice, and this we intend to do.

& And this organization, for all the things it's doing, is understaffed. Enormously understaffed. Nearly every one of those people is wearing two or three hats. Any one of their hats would be considered a full time job by anybody else. We have found, oddly enough, that only a very good auditor and good Scientologist can survive in most of the staff posts. That's an interesting fact. And when we have to put somebody in an executive position we look at his auditing skill, because that is a direct index of what he can do. That's a little less than you should take in throwing organizations together. If he can't audit, watch out. Something we have learned over the years.

Therefore, I have written this Loyalty Oath of Mental Practice and if the boys can't sign this, they shouldn't be tampering with human thinkingness.

& Ordinary business would go slightly mad trying to handle the volume and the variety of things that we handle, number of projects we get into, and the things we do. And it's, homo sapiens couldn't do it. So we've had to do something rather extra. I'm not exaggerating it, this is actually the truth.

It goes this way:

& The complexity of a Scientology organization is almost the complexity of a civilization. The only thing we do not have at the moment is somebody in charge of the galley. We just don't have that particular post covered, but we will have very shortly.

"I hereby subscribe to the following code of ethics and practice and swear to abide by it at all times."

Like to talk to you today about numerous things and somehow or other I have got to get four or five hours of lecture into the next two hours and forty-five minutes. So if I speed up and the words sort of start jamming, why start frowning at me.

The hooker in that line is an interesting one. He "swears to abide by it at all times." Failing to abide by it brings him up for a charge of perjury which is a criminal offense. So this oath has teeth in it.

Probably every nationality has a weak spot. The British undoubtedly have a weak spot, undoubtedly. The Spanish have a weak spot; the Italians have a weak spot. But Americans don't have any weak spots, do they?

"One: To support the Constitution of the government of the United States."

I'll tell you what the biggest weak spot is in America. Would you like to know about that?

Actually, that's perfectly all right. But it is an odd thing that all loyalty oaths to date have said "to support the constitution" but not "to support the government." Did you know that? They all say "support the constitution." But a psychologist ought to support the Constitution of the government of the United States. Now, these two words combined are quite interesting. Supposing the government of the United States departed from the Constitution? Then it's not the government of the United States. Okay.

Audience: Sure, yeah.

"Two: To refuse to practice brainwashing upon American citizens."

First we have to look at an interesting principle: That anything you put on automatic, you then become irresponsible for. Anything which is put into a category where you can no longer control it and have nothing further to do with it, goes out of your reach, out of your attention and becomes a disability.

I can just see some Congressman picking this loyalty oath up, you see and going "Dirk!" It never occurred to him that he has several thousand people in the country who are dedicated to brainwashing, trained in it carefully.

Now, I said the other day that a thetan was putting up his own mental image pictures and didn't know he was doing it. Well, the way he manages that is to put up an automaticity out here someplace; he mocks up something called Joe that he still feeds but doesn't control and this thing keeps feeding him his own pictures. Of course, he himself is making his own pictures but it is via this and he says, "I have no further responsibility for this over here." Do you understand that? We call that an "automaticity" in Scientology.

"Three: To actively prevent the teaching of only foreign psychology in public schools and universities."

For instance, an automobile will probably be a thing of curiosity in another thirty or forty or fifty years. Certainly it will probably be something that nobody ever sees and possibly nobody knows anything about.

Well, it's true, that's all that is taught. There are a lot of psychologies; we're not being a specialist in this line. We don't say they ought to teach Dianetics and Scientology. As a matter of fact, we probably wouldn't let them muck it up. But by golly, there's a lot of good psychologies back along the line. There's the psychology of William James, there is the educational psychology of Dewey. What's the matter with these things? Why don't they study them? Why do they have to bow down to this character Pavlov?

Why? Because the automobile is being set up as an automatic transportation device which takes the driver and the passengers places. The accident rate increases to the degree that automobiles become automatic. Now, this I'm not talking through my hat, mainly because I am not wearing one. I'm not stretching this – it – what I tell you is true.

Pavlov was probably very good for dogs. But Americans weren't the last time I looked. Furthermore, the jerk wasn't even right. I shouldn't disgrace Mr. Pavlov with that. But he is another amoral scientist. Stalin said, "Pavlov, come down here to the Kremlin, we have a little room for you. Now, you sit down there and write everything you know about dogs that you think would apply to human beings." So he did. He wrote this big manuscript about 400 pages. And they kept it in the Kremlin and about two or three years later, remember all the confessions that came forth? Well, that was Pavlov's work. And anybody that says that this boy didn't have a political pitch is goofy.

The more a thing handles somebody, the less he handles it. You got that? So this automobile that changes people's position in space eventually will become uncontrollable, the accident rate goes up, up, up. Now, the way to cut an accident rate is not to tell people they are going to have accidents. That is simply a postulate to kill them. It would be to make people take an automobile from point A to point B and never be taken by an automobile from point A to point B.

Oh, yeah, maybe he just felt overwhelmed by it all. Well, let me clue you, I haven't felt overwhelmed by it all. I just didn't wear out my elbow saluting at all when the ONR told me to come down there and research to make people more suggestible. And they said if I didn't do it, why they'd call me back to active duty.

It was very interesting. I had a Jaguar. It's gone now; it is over in Ceylon. And Mary Sue didn't like it. She didn't like it; it had a gearshift. She'd never seen a car in her whole life or driven one that had a gearshift. That's right. She had no cognizance of gearshifts. And this thing was a right-hand drive and you had to fool with the gearshift over here. And as a result – as a result she didn't like this car. Until one fine day I told her, "You have to take a Jaguar down the road. You have to take it around corners. You have to take it up to higher speeds and drop it down to lower speeds." So she says, "What do you know?" And she took the car out at once, and took it down the road, and took it around corners and took it higher and took it lower and so forth, and all of a sudden, why she could handle and control a Jaguar; it was no longer handling and controlling her. I don't think she has ever gotten back into the sloppy habit of being taken places by an automobile.

And they told me that on Monday and by Thursday I had effected a resignation from the United States Navy. And when they came back on Thursday and said, "Well, you are in for it now!" I said, "Brother, mitt me, I'm a civilian."

But if somebody didn't know that, eventually he would be sitting there and something would be steering, but it wouldn't be him. Got this? And that's the way you get more accidents. Something has been put on automatic and disaster follows, because an irresponsibility sets in.

Just because you know something, you don't have to be a rat!

All those things then that are put on automatic in this fashion – one becomes irresponsible for. And in America we have become irresponsible for those things which are built into our national life on automatic. The Constitution, the Bill of Rights, democracy. That's it – it's an automaticity.

Now, therefore we get to this one:

It was set up by a fellow by the name of George Washington; Ben Franklin helped him. Tom Jefferson, the rest of these boys, they did a good job. And as long as any of that crew was alive, there were – some life in this machinery. Right?

"To use my knowledge and skill only to the benefit of US individuals and groups."

And here and there up the line somebody has injected some life in the machinery. But listen, in America we have all the laws for freedom, and we don't have the freedom. And in Europe they don't have any of the laws for freedom, and they have freedom. You get this?

I can just see some of these boys down in ONR when this thing is shoved under their nose and they are told to sign and they are working totally upon how to make people more suggestible and cave them in. They won't be able to sign it. Too bad.

Now, this is an interesting condemnation of national life, and I am not going out on the line to tell you that America is all bad. It is not. A country is neither good nor bad; it is able or unable.

"Five: To engage in no conspiracy to commit or treat persons for purely self-interested or political reasons."

And a disability sets in when you no longer have responsibility for national functions – you become unable as a democracy. This is the greatest danger that faces the United States, not an A-bomb.

"Six: To refuse to protect criminals by supporting questionable pleas of insanity at trials."

Hardly any American – this is his weak spot – will – but will tell you this utter asininity, "Somebody's taking care of it."

"Seven: To discourage all violence against the mentally ill."

You say "Civilian defense; there is no civilian defense. You say what the devil is the idea of courting war with Russia without organizing a civilian defense?" And most of the people you talk to about that, you go right down the line and one right after the other they'll tell you, "Somebody's taking care of it.”

"Eight: To refuse to use, advocate or experiment with methods of quote-therapy-unquote, upon patients which might bring about incapacitating physical injury to the patient's brain tissue or body."

I talked to a couple of engineers not long ago, and these two fellows were very interested in rocketry and they were doing work in rocketry. And I said, "Do you boys have an orifice pressure table yet?" I knew they didn't have one fifteen years ago, and I wondered if they had gotten one since. And these two fellows looked at me and fatuously said "Oh, I am sure somebody is taking care of it."

"Nine: (And here we shoot straight at organizations raised up to support only foreign psychology.) To refuse to contribute money, dues or my services to organizations which knowingly impede American scientific research programs, or which work to discredit American psychologists to the public." And over that will float a little marker marked "APA." Because they do contribute money to impede American scientific research if they contributed a dime to getting us slambasted anywhere at any time.

Do you know what they use for a rocketry orifice pressure table that sends off their Vanguards and Snarks and Corporals? Do you know what they use? They use the hose-kick table of the Chicago Fire Department! That's still in use; I saw a copy of it the other day. Only now they pretend it is a rocketry-kick table, foot-pounds of thrust. How big does the hole in the end of the rocket have to be, and how fast should the velocity of reaction be in order to get an optimum take-off. That is what I mean by "orifice pressure," and they still use the Chicago Fire Department hose table.

"Ten: To refute propaganda to the effects that the study of psychology is hopeless, that IQ cannot be improved and that personality cannot be changed."

The hose table goes in reverse. The firemen don't want a hose to kick, so they've worked it out so as to get the minimum kick for the size of the nozzle and the velocity of the water. And we wonder why Vanguard wouldn't take off.

"Eleven: To refuse to accept for counseling or psychological assistance, and to refuse to accept money from any patient or group I feel I cannot honestly help and to offer no solution or cure I cannot accomplish."

Well, it's not quite as simple as this and maybe it isn't quite as bad as this; maybe there is somebody or another who has gotten an appropriation for figuring out the orifice pressure table.

"Twelve: To refuse to advertise beyond the display of my professional card."

But this feeling that "Somebody else is taking care of it" will someday find this country lying under a large gravestone. It's built into the national life of the country.

"Thirteen: To render good treatment, sound training and good discipline to those students or people entrusted to my care."

The rights are guaranteed: freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion. They're guaranteed utterly, you don't have to do a thing about them.

"Fourteen: To engage in no unseemly disputes with the uninformed on the subject of my profession."

Listen, if they are only in print, and nobody is making sure those rights exist, they cease to exist; and they are ceasing to exist right now.

"Fifteen: To refuse to interfere with the lives of my patients beyond actual treatment."

When you say that "the people of the United States shall choose the president of the United States," how long has it been since anybody came around and asked you who you wanted for president? They give you a couple of lunks neither one of which you'd have as office boy, and say "Which one of these do you want to vote for?" Oh, no. This is government by representation.

And this to a Scientologist here has got a real curve in it. This, sixteen – all of the psychologists and psychiatrists maintain that they support two or three of these clauses, but they don't, nobody has ever made them sign on the dotted line to do so. This one is one of them: "To refer to competent medical treatment ills which demand medical attention."

Yes, I know, I am picking on the United States mighty hard. But the United States just yesterday was the light of the world; and just today is talking about becoming a second-class power! What would make her this second-class power?

We're not sure that any do. Liberal interpretation – that's open to.

Just one thing – the political life of the country is on automatic. The third dynamic here is on automatic and there is a tremendous unwillingness on the part of individual Americans to take responsibility for any other person than himself, because it's all by law guaranteed that everybody will take care of everybody else; but one doesn't have to take care of anybody. Do you got it?

"Seventeen: (And just to agree with them) to hold in confidence the secrets of my patients."

Now, that sounds awfully harsh, and you may back up and say "Well, Ron is really taking his finger off of his number these days."

And, eighteen is the deadly one: "To accept as fellow psychologists only psychologists adhering to this code and to speak no word of criticism in public of them."

But it is a little disheartening to go out and swap lead with a bunch of stupid jerks like John Foster Dulles losing the war before it is ever fought. One can get bitter about things like this. Good men lay down their lives to keep an enemy off our shores and then somebody works all day and all night to lose the peace. How could anybody permit him to? Just one thing: "Somebody else will take care of it."

Well, that's more than a piece of paper. This organization, the National Academy of American Psychology has this program: To place under the noses of every person in mental practice in the United States whether graduated from universities or anything else, a copy of this code and ask them to sign on the dotted line, whether it is done by mail or in person, and to carefully note down all those who refuse to sign it. Very important that last step.

Now, it works this way: "Me and my little vote, me and my little vote couldn't possibly influence the course of the federal government. Me and my little vote are insignificant in the face of this overwhelming something or other."

Since a police officer, or a legislator would be unable to conceive of why they couldn't sign it. And to this degree the only credit I take unto myself in the writing of this code is I consider it as a masterpiece just to this degree, that a fellow who means ill wouldn't dare sign it, but a police officer hearing that he couldn't and reading it, would not be able to figure out why. Do you get it? In other words, this blows into view the fact that there are tremendous numbers of people in mental practice who would not adhere to this code even vaguely, many parts of it.

They used to tell us that "The United States Navy was too big; it couldn't be efficient anymore." It couldn't be efficient because it was too big. The US government can't be controlled because it is too big.

But when they rush into legislators and say, "We've got to legislate out of existence all these psycho-quacks!" And when they rush into the police and say, "We got to arrest all those bad people over there because they're unethical." They are talking from a point we used to call a hidden standard.

There is only one thing that enfranchises the federal government and that is the United States people. And when those people are no longer able to take responsibility for others than themselves, then there is no further a democracy here. There will be a totalitarianism, or a socialism or some new -ism, but there won't any longer be a United States of America, a democratic nation.

Your mother used to say to you, "You could be a much better girl." Your father used to say to you, "You should be a better boy." Your teacher used to say to you, "Why aren't you a better student?"

What is this all about? Well, this is backing up the hearse, isn't it? But don't you think the hearse has been backed up rather rapidly here in the last few weeks or months? We actually have been skirting on the edge of war ever since Eisenhower was reelected. We have somebody who is probably the worst hated American abroad kept thoroughly in office, who the other day said, "No, I will not help the Dutch in Indonesia." And the communists came right on along and picked it up.

Well, look, what was "a better student?" What was "a good girl?" What was a "good boy?" If you ask any kid to define these things, they will think it over for a while and finally come up with a startling answer, "that a good boy never moves and is dead."

Do you know what the communists do with a country? Do you know what sort of an economy communism is? It is such a bad economy, such a bad slave economy that inflation undreamed of in any other land, such as ours, demands that nation after nation has to be gobbled up so that it can be gutted! They can not produce in Russia enough food, enough clothing, enough shoes. A slave economy never can produce these things.

These people have been rushing around passing legislative bills and beating the drum and getting articles in magazines from a hidden standard; they act as though they had a standard! They act as though they are decent people and that all other people are bad and therefore should be punished, so we are turning around and saying, "Look, prove that you are decent people before you talk." And that's what that's for.

How do they keep living? By eating Red China! By starving the satellites more than they themselves are starved – and that is how they keep going. An interesting thing.

Now, if we are industrious about this, we can do totally a clerical job. This is only a clerical job; it is no more important than that. Those people who contribute their time to it will simply contribute their time clerically, that's all; I mean it's just a – it's just a routine action. This thing is really grooved.

If you could see Russia as sort of a vacuum that must have new conquests continually in order to go on living, you will then understand more about the international political situation, I am afraid, than Dr. Dulles.

This folder you have here requires no letter of explanation beyond the letter of explanation inside its first page. It merely says what the NAAP is; it says what its purpose is and it asks the fellow to, on this side, sign this loyalty oath of mental practice, and on this side asks him to fill this in for application for membership. Membership doesn't cost him anything.

A lawyer always has an odd idea of property. Property is something that is in the lap of the Gods and at the issuance of the court. A lawyer, when he sees property, normally sees it in transit, in litigation and so forth. The property of the Dutch in Indonesia was the property of the Dutch. And lawyer Dulles said, "Well, we'll keep our hands off of Indonesia" and now you will see in the next few weeks the communists again bolstering their tottering inflationary economy by taking everything there is in Indonesia and shipping it back home to Russia. Just like Franklin Delano let them take everything in Manchuria and ship it back to Russia. Just as they let them take everything in East Germany and ship it back to Russia.

The only thing a membership says in it is that he's supposed to follow that loyalty oath, that's all, it's the only thing required of him.

You talk about locusts. Since the days of Ghengis Khan or before, these people have never acted differently than as a vacuum of goods. The campaigns of Ghengis Khan and these campaigns against Indonesia and so forth, differ only as a political conquest differs from a military conquest.

The organization does sell this factor; it does sell this service that it will validate qualifications. The NAAP will actually issue a certificate saying to wit, "That the National Academy of American Psychology, chartered in the District of Columbia has subscribed that so-and-so has subscribed to the policies of the NAAP and has sworn to the loyalty oath of mental practice, and that a thorough investigation, examination of his qualifications demonstrates him to be skilled in, in this particular case Scientology, which has nothing to do with psychology." In other words it validates his qualifications.

All right here's this tremendous amount of goods that sat in Indonesia; they have now been appropriated to the Indonesian government. But where do they go now? The little people of Indonesia, one of these fine days, will wake up and somebody will be coming by with a truck taking away their hoes and shovels. Oh, you say, that's kind of weird. What do you mean? Well, if they don't leave them hoes and shovels to work with how will they get any other produce. That's a problem the Russians have never solved and that is their national weakness; that you have got to let somebody else breathe in order to get production!

Now, why do we do that? Well, it's like this, we're going to make a charge for that service, but here is what happens to that money. Out of the goodness of our hearts or desire to get the show on the road, we'll pay the cost and the toll out of our own pockets to put that loyalty oath under the hands of all the psychologists in any area, as by the way – find – and psychiatrists – as discoverable in the telephone book Yellow Pages. See in any given area you just look up in the telephone book Yellow Pages, and you look 'em up and send one to each one. Wait a certain period of time, find out those you don't hear from. Call them up and say, "What's the matter?" The – a lot of them will sign. But those who refuse to, hah, we want the fact that they refused, and if that person is in an important position, such as head of the local society – one Scientologist accompanied by another one can walk in with the loyalty oath and say, "Here's this loyalty oath, and you didn't sign it and send it back to us in the mails. Don't you want to sign it?" And the fellow will say, "No! I refuse to have anything to do with it!!" And you say, "That's fine, that's fine. You refuse to sign it, is that correct?" It is all they do, see? Nice and pleasant. And the fellow says, "That's right! Bong! Bong!" Two witnesses, they take the oath, they fill the guy's name in here "I (whatever the fellow's name was)" and over here say, "refuse to sign, (such-and-such a date) in the presence of...” – and sign the two witnesses. And we here in Washington will compile the ledger sheet of these and when we are all through, and this is all done, and if we are a little bit industrious, it will only take a few months.

And the Russian thinks that if you just sit on somebody else's head hard enough and don't let him breathe then you get production!

Now, this particular trick particularly applies to those psychologists who will be chosen on the Board of Examiners of the California Board as recently formed by Public Bill 2712, California Legislature, or 3712. They recently passed a bill saying only psychologists could practice psychology. Good! "Psyche" means spirit! So a fellow who isn't working in the field of the spirit isn't a psychologist.

This is a war of production that is going on right now, and every piece of goods that is permitted to fall into Russian hands, from whatever source, simply bolsters an economy which very well might collapse in the next few months! It is a day-to-day proposition.

But what we want to have happen to those examiners is that a couple of Scientologists walk in to the office of each one of 'em when they are chosen and have them refuse to sign that, and then inform the governor and the legislature that they have chosen people who are disloyal to the United States to serve on that bill! And keep doing this until we get some psychologists that are favorable.

A bellhop in Russia gets no more money than a bellhop here; but eggs are two and three dollars apiece, and you might be able to get two a week. If you got a new pair of shoes a year you are in a capitalistic class. These people are starving to death.

This thing's got teeth in it, because these people have an awful time trying to explain why they are attacking American psychology. There is such a thing as American psychology; its right name is Dianetics.

When any worker gets home, the kids always ask, "Did you bring anything to eat this time?" These people work hard. The Russian says, "Oh, well, you should have economies that everybody – everybody can come along, you know, and they all pool the goods and we'll all be rich and wealthy." Well, they've never gotten rich and wealthy on this theory.

But when these fellows lift their heads and say, "Admiral of the National Academy of American Psychology, they're no good – they're – they're no good. They're no good – they're no – well wait a – they're – boom." I'm afraid we have a muzzler. I'm afraid they'll have to keep their mouths shut. Oh, they won't; they won't, there'll be some screaming about it, but I don't think there's any personal danger in it at all, I think there's mild routine clerical action. And this organization being a national organization simply undertook the job of ascertaining the loyalty of various psychologists, psychiatrists and psychoanalysts in the United States and validated their qualifications, said whether their qualifications were real or not, that's all the organization did. You see? And here's the list of the fellows that signed and here's the list of the fellows that didn't sign. Now, I wouldn't go so far as to deport these fellows that didn't sign. I ...

Europe has long since learned that only private enterprise and the freeing of individuals can bring about a successful economy; and Europe long since let go of its slaves, but Russia hasn't yet; she is still operating on this economy.

But I think that we can use this factor of loyalty and all of that sort of thing to clean up the field. It happens to mesh. It happens to make good sense and it happens to be doable, and the forces of law and order, I think, will find it impossible to understand why somebody wouldn't sign that oath of mental practice. It's totally reasonable to a law enforcement officer.

That whole state would collapse if she could get no further goods from conquered satellites. This maybe is to you a brand-new view of Russian economy.

Whereas you and I know positively something else. We know these people even though they are good Americans have been schooled totally in some university that taught them "that IQ couldn't change." That taught them, "that personality could not be altered." That taught them that "brainwashing was the very thing to do." That taught them the work of Pavlov, the work of Wundt, had never been surpassed in any way, and taught them above and beyond that contempt for anyone and everyone working newly in American research. The country could lose its next war because it has a disloyal, uninformed profession called psychology in its midst. You don't think the Russians exported it, do you?

Well, are we going any such route? Yes, we're going such a route, but we're going the route of "I couldn't do anything. Poor little me with my insignificant vote against this huge automaticity. I can't do anything."

They didn't even export brainwashing as far as Korea. The boys that were doing brainwashing in Korea were not experts; there're probably far more expert brainwashers around the Kremlin, they got much better results; they get about a 100 percent nervous breakdown and total confession on the part of everybody they treat. But I don't think that's good for a man. To have loose upon him the only quote – mental practice as something that can drive him into a nervous breakdown or wreck him.

Well, look, if you don't do anything, nothing is going to get done. There is nobody else to do it.

Did you ever run into a psychoanalytical patient who wasn't being careful! And if he was – if he went on being careful for years, he might be all right. Have you ever run into these people? And so on. It's not good for people. We don't care whether it's good for them or bad for them. They can go right on teaching all about it and go right on teaching it as long as they don't try to use it on us and make us believe that it is an exclusive thing and that they have a total monopoly on study, research and practice in the field of the human mind and spirit, when they don't even practice in that field.

It has been built into this society that it is a bad thing to take responsibility for any other person than yourself; that's built into this American state just by this dependency for freedom on this automaticity. Automaticities die out, remember, they don't serve you forever.

Now this does not make or put Scientology underneath psychology. It does not do that. It is simply an effort to clean up the field from one end to the other; that's all.

"Willingness to take responsibility from some other but than myself." And boy does this process on an American. Now, the Englishman is not quite this way; he's different, just a little bit different than the American. Fascinatingly so, because you say, "Is there anyone you don't have to take responsibility for." And he'll respond better. The darned fool has taken responsibility for everybody to such a degree that you can't get him out of group sessions. You just – it's rough.

We want them to sign the mental oath and then we want them to get their qualifications validated.

Just let a bunch of Britishers get together and discuss an issue. Oh, no! You will be there until two or three o'clock in the morning trying to get this thing thrashed out, because everybody takes responsibility for the issue.

Now, why do we want this certificate? Why do we want this certificate? Well, we have another problem. We've had universities for decades issuing degrees in philosophy with a psychology major which taught in the main only Russian-European works, so that these degrees are kicking around as the only recognized degrees in the subject. But the fellow who holds them can't do anything. Sooner or later the whole field is going to collapse unless somebody takes a bolster in it and we have a vested interest in keeping the public credence alive.

Well, there is nothing bad about this at all, and it is probably the only reason they are still afloat.

Therefore if we issue these validation of qualifications, you understand this is not – this is not a certificate guaranteeing anything but the fact that the guy is qualified. Do you understand that? We validate his existing credentials. Do you see that? This is not credentials; this merely validates his existing credentials.

They don't have democracy on automatic. Somebody put a short dirk into the throat of King John while Old Yea and Nay was off to the Crusades. And he says, "Johnny, sign here. Sign here." And they've had to fight for it ever since. I think they got it in the first place as a Roman tradition. I think it's probably the only place in the world where Roman ethics and political philosophy still exist without much alteration. The Anglo-Saxons tried to knock it over, the Jutes, the rest of the people that came in there have tried to squash this down. The Normans have come in, everybody has tried to make a slave out of the Englishman, and he is the least slavish fellow you ever ran into in your life. It's quite interesting, quite interesting.

We will take all of the money collected for this certificate; it will cost a Scientologist about 25 dollars; it will cost a psychologist, when you finally get around to reaching him with it, about $80. You will, you'll have to examine him. He says he's an expert in yoga, all right he is an expert in yoga, you go, "Fine," crack a book on yoga and see if he knows his business. If he doesn't know his business in yogi, flunk him.

A fellow who carries coal up the steps, the guy that waits on you in the restaurant – none of these people consider themselves slaves. But one of these days an American is going to consider himself a slave, one of these days, because his freedom is on automatic; and because he has been carefully taught that he should take care of number one.

We're being reasonable! But we'll take all of that money, and with money maybe from another source, and we will publish in such publications as The Saturday Evening Post, Time magazine and all the rest of them a picture of this certificate, saying, "Be sure that your mental practitioner has one."

America holds in question anyone who would help her. And if you look over her history, you will find out that she has a national habit of killing off anyone who would come to her assistance. She owes an A-bomb to oh, several hundred scientists, but some of the key scientists who built that A-bomb have today been kicked out of the government – for subversion? No, no, it's not subversion to open your mouth. They have been kicked out for one reason only. I am afraid it's because they helped.

Now "live and let live" is a very fine philosophy; there's nothing wrong with live and let live as a philosophy until you try to apply it to a mad dog. And you pat the mad dog on the head and say, "Well, you can go on living" and he bites your hand off. Right? So there is a point where live and let live can't go forward. But there is a also a point where reasonability enters and punishment or duress begins.

You look over America's history along this line, you'll find out that it is a bad one. This is a stupidity.

We cannot afford to take somebody who is perfectly willing to go along with this program and clean up psychology and just because he doesn't believe in us, or our school, knock his head off. Do you get the idea? This is not a promotion of Scientology – it's not a promotion of Dianetics – it's trying to keep these boys from muddying up the field and stopping us from getting a show on the road. And we are perfectly willing from where I sit that anybody practice anything he cares to practice as long as he practices it within the framework of that mental oath. Because we don't want people practicing who kill people. We don't want people practicing who rob families of their last penny and then throw the guy into the local state institution. We don't want people in practice that evaluate-evaluate- evaluate and mess up cases.

Now, we can talk straight from the shoulder here with no thought of real criticism for this reason: We can do something about it. The willingness to take responsibility for somebody other than yourself is at the root of every successful marriage. Why do we have all of these divorces in the United States? Why is this level of divorce so high?

One thing, we're trying to get a show on the road. Every now and then these people circulate around into our hands. Every now and then we get an ex-electric shock case, unbeknownst to us, we suddenly have in the organization an electric shock case. We didn't take this person aboard to a – as a psychotic. We took this person to improve his capabilities and to make him a little more able to live, and all of a sudden we are having to undo for almost the totality of the intensive, the quote-treatment-unquote, the actual brutality rendered by some psychiatrist that didn't even know the difference.

And why, by the way, for another reason other than automaticity, is the level of auto accidents so high? Hmm? Maybe all of these things have got the same root: "Don't take responsibility for the other guy." It's just low pan-determinism, that's all.

I knew of a girl one time went into a psychiatric office, I think to deliver a letter, and they set her down in the chair and gave her an electric shock. They thought she was a patient.

I usually drive five cars at once: My own car, the car behind, the car ahead, the car coming in from the right and the car coming in from the left. If you don't drive all five of 'em – it's very easy to do in this country, it's not hard – it's not so easy to do in France. But it is rather easy to do in this country; there is seldom anybody else at the wheel.

There is one that I didn't put in there, which would have been very, very interesting to do so. There's one I didn't put in there. "That a practitioner must be willing to receive the treatment he administers."

Ah, yes, I am undoubtedly being very critical, but I'm being critical for a reason. Do you want to know why somebody is failing consistently in his marriage. It's because he is unwilling to take responsibility for others than himself. You want to know why somebody is failing consistently on the job. It's because he is unwilling to take responsibility for anybody in the office or any other jobs in the office but himself

Male voice: Put it in there Ron.

You want to know why somebody is a bit antisocial, he can't get along with people. It's because he will not take responsibility for others than himself You want to know why somebody doesn't organize a group or carry it along? It is because he is unwilling to take responsibility for others than himself

I suppose it ought to be in there.

Now, when we get up to a national disaster such as an atom bomb and this thing is posed to us, it tends to make "only ones" out of any population. So at this particular moment in American history, this trait which might have ridden along all right, is not being tremendously accentuated, because the atom bomb tends to make "only ones" out of all of us. We say "How could I possibly even vaguely influence any sensible course of action?" And it is accentuated that you have no control over the international policy of your country. Because if it was left up to you, any one of you in this audience, you would say, "Scrap the damn things!" You'd say, "Well, let's get ahold of Russia, let's get ahold of the other countries, and let's take them all out and find a deep part of the ocean and drop them in; and then utterly forbid any further manufacture of fission for any reason whatsoever." I am sure you would propose something like this if it was left up to you! But you know what you would propose; and you see this huge automaticity that nobody is in charge of called the government, doing quite the opposite; and you therefore consider yourself powerless on the third dynamic and you drop back into even more of an only one characteristic.

Audience voices: Yes.

But listen, if somebody doesn't say it, and if you don't say it, it will never be done!

Well, if you say so – why then we'll republish it on a later edition and include that one in.

Now, you say, if each one rose up en masse and said this and expressed it as a "will of the people," it would go across. Oh, no, there is nobody cares anything about the will of the people. It's you! The will of the people isn't a live breathing thing, it can't eat or sleep. It breaks down to you.

Okay.

And therefore the solution of our national problems, I'm afraid, is not possible outside the realm of Scientology. Man doesn't know enough about it.

Now, this is no effort to get people in Scientology to sign an oath of allegiance to the United States or anything of the sort. It would be a good thing, however, if it were signed by people in Scientology, because therefore they weren't – that would have been processed. If for any reason one doesn't want to sign an oath of allegiance to the United States that's perfectly all right. Nobody is forcing anybody to sign this. We would not even take note of it in Scientology if one did not want to sign it. I'm making that very clear because these things can become ways and means of duress and so on which they shouldn't.

When you have an atom bomb making everybody an only one, the threat of total destruction, and then you tend to say "I couldn't." But supposing you could say – any one of you, and every one of you – could say, "I can do something about this."

But I'll tell you this: The exact program which we have laid down here at this moment is this. I think there is in existence in the back of the hall a membership card for each and every one of you in the NAAP already typed and signed. Is that correct?

Well, I'll tell you something very esoteric and very magical about the whole thing. If you thoroughly ran out the idea that an atom bomb could affect you, and if you established the idea that you could affect the atom bomb, you could probably stand (this is the reductio ad absurdum of this) in the middle of an atomic blast and never even get your hair parted.

Dr. Elliott has them and there's a card. The card doesn't cost you anything at all and all you have to do, and this sounds like it's a pitch of some sort or another, but it isn't, all you have to do is sign your name on it and have the next two guys in line sign as witnesses real quick as a bunny and hand this in which is an application for membership, don't you see, sign your name on this and your signature at the bottom, hand it in and they'll hand you your membership card. It's as easy as that. We are bribing you to come to this congress, see. If you want one of those cards it's yours. You don't have to have one, but if you want one it is yours and your name's already typed up back there and you are a member of this organization.

A living thing has to make up its mind that it can be harmed by something before it can be harmed by it. You have to carry with you the seeds of your own destruction before you can be hurt by anything. You have to make up your mind that you can be hurt by an automobile before you can be hurt by an automobile. You have to give your consent to be destroyed, even to get a cut finger.

Well, what is a member of this organization? It is simply a person who has subscribed to the policies and has sworn the mental oath in the field of psychology; that's all. It does not make him a psychologist. Got that? So that's all yours from me to you.

I'll show you an interesting little experiment. Sometime take the hair of your arm, ladies don't have any hairs in their arm – and take a pair of clippers or a scissors and just run it over those hairs and watch them. It's very magical, the clippers cut the hair. "Oh," you say, "this is the most routine thing, I mean, of course, the hardness of the shears and the hardness of the hair when compared to-." You figure it all out by energy and mathematics and a whole bunch of goof buffoonery; but the truth of the matter is if there is nothing there but knowingness, the hair has to know it can be cut by the shears before it parts; and there are all sorts of things that can't be cut by things. There are all sorts of substances that cannot be cut by substances. Well, none of these substances know that the other substance can harm it, and that's why it can't happen.

Now, if you also want to pick up one of these things and you are qualified to Scientology, you can at once, for this excellent reason, that we have all of your qualifications here; those of you who are qualified in Scientology, we know it, we have records on the subject, and you can pick those up at once.

Why is it that almost unlimited tonnage of TNT can be dropped upon a city and still find people alive in it? It's very probable they made up their minds they couldn't be hurt by bombs. How is it that they could pull people out of the rubble in Tokyo – this tremendous shattering blast that destroyed the whole center of the city – and how is it that they found so many people alive in the middle of that city? Obviously an atomic bomb with its heat, fury, fragmentation, fire blast and everything else – the fire storm – naturally would let no living thing live.

I am not stressing that – you don't have to pick one of these up at all, ever. But I'm just telling you that it is available for you. Because we want you, to hand these out across America. Got that?

Well, this is very peculiar and one of the things that I've always been amazed about in areas of destruction and I know something about areas of destruction, is the fact that there are a lot of guys standing right there in the path of the thing and they're still alive! You say well, this is the way we have figured it: If the disaster had been worse, they would have been dead. We have no proof of that at all, they're not dead. That would be only thing that proved it, don't you see?

Well, I take it that you find some favor in this program. Huh? Good.

Well, let's take this thing of responsibility further. In order to handle an atom bomb and not have it handle you, you would have to take responsibility for it; you'd have to flatten it as a problem. You'd have to take responsibility for that atom bomb. And if you say, "That is that horrible automaticity over there, and this is poor, little, old weak me way back here." Boy, can it eat you up – chomp, chomp.

I take it that there is then some willingness to participate in this program.

If you were in a state of mind where you said, "Me here and that poor little old atom bomb there," why it would go Boom! And you would pat it on the top of its burst and say, "Nice little atom bomb. A cute toy for the kids."

All right, then do I take it that you have volunteered to participate to some degree in this program?

Now, I'll tell you there is some interesting proofs of all this. A problem of comparable magnitude; the willingness to take responsibility for – same thing.

Audience voices: Yeah, yes.

We take a married couple, they've always been fighting, fighting, fighting, fighting, fighting. Well, the fighting seems to be mostly from the wife, and she is just chewing the husband up something fierce. And we take the husband, not the wife, we don't influence her national life at all; and we would process the husband on problems of comparable magnitude to the wife, and finish it off with "What about the wife could he be responsible for?" That is a hot process! And she stops raising hell with him.

Okay, here's a map of the United States, we've already assigned the areas to the various people.

But wait a minute, we didn't process the wife, we processed the husband. Well, you could say, "Well, in view of his – in view of his changed behavior, he was probably courteous to her, probably didn't fight with her, probably didn't invite it any more, he probably – actions and so forth." Oh, I swear we can trace this in vain and we still can't find a real reason why; he is doing mostly the same things or worse!

Now, you don't have to have those districts; it was just made sure that somebody in the congress was covering each part of the United States so we'd have it covered, but for heaven sakes take it up if you don't want this, and you want to pass it along, or if you want to deputize somebody and hold onto your appointment, because it's yours otherwise.

So in one such test case, he was always in trouble if he got home five minutes late. So I made sure that he not only got home five minutes late, but every once in a while, four or five hours late! And you know what happened, the wife went on being kind, sweet and considerate about the whole thing. But we hadn't processed her!

Now, what is a person expected to do if he was so appointed. You don't have to have this. Those are conditional appointments.

I'll give you another example. There was a fellow that the cops picked up down in Union Station, and he was always being picked up by cops. He was a well dressed young man, but the cops would come along and they'd pick him up. This was his fate. And we processed him on problems of comparable magnitude to cops and "What about cops he could take responsibility for," and you know what happened? He hasn't been picked up since.

What are you expected to do? Actually expected to simply mail (this is one of the easiest things you ever heard of) you're simply expected to mail one of these (you will have to pick up a number of folders for your area) one of these – National Academy of American Psychology – and all you are is a District Director, and you have to mail one of these to every name and address for a psychologist, a psychiatrist, or psychoanalyst in the area given. And you can get them out of yellow phone books and you can get them from other sources, but you simply send one of these to each one, and then note that you have sent them to each one.

Now, that's an interesting state of affairs; how to influence something without doing anything to it? Hmm. So this lecture I gave you about knowingness and so forth was not necessarily off the groove here. How to do something to it? Well, the funny part of it is you've always felt that if you knew about something it couldn't do anything to you. You've had an idea that there's some knowingness entered into this cause and effect on things, right? You just kind of knew it, why it wouldn't, you know?

They will send them back with an application of membership filled out and signed, or they won't return them at all. Now, at the moment they don't return them at all after a reasonable length of time, you call their attention to it again and get a refusal by mail if possible. You are after refusals. No further responsibility settles upon your back at all.

Well, it's a very special kind of knowingness that you actually are looking for. It is a knowingness that you can survive in spite of it. But higher than that, knowing that you do not have to be killed, maimed or injured or thrown off course by it. Do you understand that? The knowingness is that you're okay where it is concerned.

When that job is done, there is another job that you can do. And that is simply to offer these people a certificate of validation of qualifications. It costs money and they'd have to come in and examine it. A certain amount of that money would stay in your hands as having examined it. All the remainder of that money would be invested in advertising to say, "That your psychologist, psychiatrist or psychoanalyst should be a loyal American." Got it?

Now, in some weird and peculiar way you can influence the behavior of such things as governments, atomic bombs and other things with regard to you on the first dynamic. But that's just you.

That's all there is to the job; there's nothing else. It's just a job of dissemination. It's clerical just like I told you. See? There isn't any beating the drum or making any speeches or anything else. It's just mail them out, note when you don't get them back, check those that never replied and we will probably do the rest.

What would happen if you were willing to take responsibility on a much broader sphere? If you were willing to take responsibility for others than yourself And you had no conquering fear of atomic bombs; you had no great fear of other things, of political upsets, of inflation or something of the sort. And you were taking responsibility for other people.

Sooner or later you will have to appoint a couple of people in your area to go and call on the ones who occupy high official posts to have them sign or refuse to sign before witnesses. You understand that? That is a special operation which comes at the tail end of this other operation.

Well, if you were willing to do that, I am afraid that you would spread a mantle over these people which would protect them too. And that's a third dynamic.

And if you do this clerical operation in your immediate area or get this clerical operation done, do you know what we'll wind up with? We will wind up with the largest numerical strength organization in the field of psychology, and can thereafter talk with authority on the ethics of its practice and teachings in the United States.

One of the manifestations of the third dynamic is just that. Do you understand that? Quite weird – the mechanics of this sort of thing. It actually defies a reasonable explanation. Only in Dianetics and Scientology would we be able to even have language enough to talk about these things.

And there would be an end to this shotgunning. Every time somebody desires to help his fellow human being, why we can end this idea that he should be shot down. That's a very totalitarian sort of an idea. You know? That you should be punished for wanting to help your fellow man. I think that's how they make slaves.

It used to be if you had a charm or an amulet given to you by the witch doctor then the ghosts couldn't get you. Do you get that sort of thing? Well, that was a deterioration for you having direct responsibility for the object yourself. Something that is nine times better than a witch doctor's charm or a political vote is a confidence that you can be an effect to it, that you can affect it, and that it can't harm you. Now that is the only efficacy of a charm, an amulet, a luck piece.

Now, we are not actually fighting the APAs. You want to know what their position might be in relationship to this? American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association. If they were either of them American associations, they would have done this a long time ago. They were the people in charge and responsible for this. They did not do their job obviously because mental practice is in a muddy state in the United States.

I did an interesting experiment here a few days on the subject of luck. Could you vary luck? I am sure that we can vary luck these days. I said, "You know, I haven't had any breaks lately. I haven't had any good breaks." We used to talk about "breaks" in the writing business all the time, you know. And I just haven't had any good breaks lately.

I do know, however, that they have called up before their ethics committee people who have dared to practice a subject not ratified by them! They have actually called up psychologists for trying to test or do something with Dianetics. So they are not representative of psychology in the United States! They are representative only of a certain school or a certain series of schools of psychology in the United States.

So I said, "Well, that's just a matter of making up your mind to have some good breaks." So I made up my mind to have some good breaks. In the ensuing week I sold a movie and had a heck of a lot of other things happen, all of which were unexpected. Then I forgot about it. But I just made up my mind that I was going to have good luck for a few days – breaks.

If anything, they represent the "academic psychologist" – if they totally represent him. But if they had done this job, we would not be doing this job now! Do you see that? So therefore it's plain that they are not representative of psychology and psychiatry in the United States. Actually, their membership is in a minority. There are many, many people who are outside the field of their membership. This is quite interesting. I am not even condemning these organizations and not even trying to shoot them from guns, because Saturday morning a letter left the NAAP for the American Psychiatric Association and another letter left the NAAP for the American Psychological Association, headquarters of which are both – are in Washington, giving them a copy of this oath and asking them how many they needed to circulate their membership for us! Let me tell you a trick. You do not begin a pan-determined operation by counting a lot of people out. You understand that? So we have no intentions of kicking around or reviling either of these organizations, unless of course, they refuse and block to subscribe to any higher ethical levels, at which time it is my belief that they cease to be classified as scientists and must be classified only as subversives and butchers.

Responsibility, the willingness to take responsibility for things – how do you achieve that as an auditor? It isn't something you just have to make up your mind about.

But remember we are not going to call them subversives and butchers until they call them that, themselves – first. And I don't think it will ever come to this pass.

Poor old Gautama Buddha actually had a rough time with this. He said all you have to do is conceive mind essence and you got it made; but if you start conceiving a static you get sick as a pup. So the answer lies someplace shallower than that deep dive.

This is what I hope to have happen, plotting the future course. I would consider it a disaster if the APAs each of them got a copy of this oath, looked it over and said, "Ha! Ha. Neah." and threw it in the wastebasket and said nothing.

Let's look at this. Is there a process which immediately takes over this sort of thing? Yes, there are several processes; we are rich in such processes. We would run a process that more or less ran as follows if we wanted to totally exhaust a particular subject. Now, remember that you run all such processes against terminals. You run all such processes against terminals.

Or looked at this oath and said, "Rahh! Rowl! Under no circumstances will we have anything to do with this mental oath and put into our hands the evidence that we could not do otherwise with – than destroy them." It's highly possible that they may each of us – each of them write a letter saying they wish nothing whatsoever to do with a higher standard of practice. Because those who are trying to succumb usually do when you give them a chance.

First, you have the preclear invent a problem. If he can do that you have him invent a problem worse than the terminal you've selected out. It has to be a terminal, not an idea or a condition. "Invent something worse than Mama. Invent something worse than an atomic bomb." Anything you care to, see, but it has to be a terminal.

But I would consider either of those things a disaster, so mark me well. I expect them to write back and say, "This isn't too bad. Who the hell are you? If you care to make a few changes we could subscribe to this ourselves." Do you get the thing and argue around and go into communication about it until we got both of these organizations to force upon their membership something as good as this, and boy, would we have had it made. We'd have it made then, totally.

Your next step when you've got that sort of flat is, "Invent a problem of comparable magnitude to the terminal." And then finally, "Something about the terminal for which you could be responsible." And if you run those, you've run the whole cycle.

But these organizations have never been pan-determined. They have closed out of existence practically every fellow in the United States who wished to work in the field of counseling who did not have university training, of five or six years in the subject. Now, that isn't right, because it precludes [presumes] the fact that the universities are teaching how to counsel. See that? That's an unreasonable assumption.

You first run "Prevent it from getting worse" you see. The dwindling spiral you have run out with "Invent something worse than." There goes your dwindling spiral. That's actually, by the way, all there is to a dwindling spiral is: individuals are dreading something worse than! If there wasn't a "Something worse than" there, there would be no dwindling spiral. Do you get the idea?

If a university teaches nothing but Wundt and Pavlov and the parts of the brain, then it doesn't look to me that the university training would qualify one to practice in the field of the mind. Don't you see? But the legislators and other people are assuming that that is the case.

They are always being cautioned about "Well, I know that your lot is pretty bad, but it could be much worse!!" And then the individual after that goes around preventing it from getting much worse. Well, in order to prevent it from getting much worse he has to hold on to the thing. Right?

So as a result you have probably two-thirds of those people interested in counseling and mental practice in the United States already excluded out of these two organizations: The American Psychiatric, the American Psychological, so it's no wonder the thing has gotten into bad shape, if there is no organization that is setting a standard of ethics for practice.

In order to keep his legs or his arms from getting worse, he has to have them in the condition they're in. Right? And that freezes them; they start then on a dwindling spiral because he sort of thinks about this "worseness" and it is like a postulate, and he sort of pulls himself into the worseness. You get the idea? So "Invent something worse than that leg," actually knocks the dwindling spiral and deterioration of the leg out.

If they have psycho-quacks on their hands that they are worried about, they have only themselves to blame. I have tested this time after time after time in Dianetics and Scientology. Cancelling a certificate because of reported misconduct. That action has never brought with it anything but enturbulence. It has never corrected anything, and that's because 99 percent of the guy's actions were always dictated by his interpretation of the decent thing to do. These people were acting as they thought best for all hands, always. And none of them merited any such punishment.

Now, a problem of comparable magnitude actually brings it up to a sort of a parity, so that you are taking responsibility really by inventing-taking-being cause over the problem the terminal can be, and then you finally get up to the point of just what part of it directly could you be responsible for. Of course, incidentally, you remedy games with "Problems of comparable magnitude." And "Something worse than." That's a very interesting thing to do.

Therefore I wrote the PAB, "The Rights of the Field Auditor." Remember it? Which you can get a copy of back there. I found out there was no slightest benefit in doing so. The only thing that one could do that had any efficacy at all was to tell the fellow what you meant by ethics; instead of hiding the standard, display one. Don't work from a hidden standard, work from a displayed standard. And say, "Look, you will get along better if you don't do so-and-so and so-and-so. Do you understand? And if you do so-and-so and so-and-so you will find that's a little higher ethical standard and you will get along better."

I wonder what would happen if many of you invented something worse than another person, and invented a problem of comparable magnitude to another person. And then went out on the street and had the auditor say to you – the auditor would say, "Find something about that girl you could be responsible for." You got this as a spotting process? I wonder what would happen to you on the third? And I wonder what would happen if only the few hundred people here made this a little project? I wonder what would happen to the life of the United States? I wonder what would happen?

And I have never had anything but a "Thank you," when I have told somebody that, and I have never had anything but enturbulence and a kick in the teeth when we cancelled somebody's certificate and tried to punish them. Do you understand?

It's an interesting thing, we're running a test project right now on the atom bomb. We haven't finished the thing off, but there is no reason why you shouldn't run it. Of course that's a pretty rugged thing to start out with on a new process, so you'd better take something that is a present time problem, and "Invent something worse than..” and "Problems of comparable magnitude to ..." And then, something – "Part of it that you could be responsible for," don't you see. And then you get that level – I wonder if you graduated up to "Invent something worse than an atom bomb?" "A problem of comparable magnitude to the atom bomb," and "Some part of the atom bomb you could be responsible for?" – I wonder if it could touch any of you?

We evidently can't punish into better conduct anybody! But we can educate people into what better conduct is, as we have found it, and leave it up to their determinism, whether or not they will find it better and then we can improve a field.

And then if you flattened "people," I wonder if any people you organized together could be touched by it either. Interesting speculation, isn't it? Hmm?

And so it is with the NAAP. This is an educative move, not a judicial, and treated in that spirit and circulated and disseminated throughout the United States, it is liable to have a rather fantastic impact even if people just read it and never sign it. They will say, "Look that is a standard of practice. Oh, this is something that people would be expected to measure up to. Fine." Or, "Gosh, that's awfully stiff." But it could not do otherwise than increase the ethical standards of the field of practice of mental practitioners. Any way you look at it and anything we do with it. Do you understand that?

But the one thing the American doesn't take much pleasure in doing is taking responsibility for somebody other than himself This he has a hard time doing.

It's not a punitive move; it is an educative move. Its total conduct is clerical; we merely want it to disseminate it.

For a country that once had the reputation for joining anything and everything, and at the drop of a hat, which is kind of natural to man, we have a condition where nobody is willing to join anything. It's an interesting state of affairs nationally.

And any one of you who care to become a member of it now will find right at the back of the room there plenty of these laid out, these oaths, all he has to do is sign and get another couple of guys to sign, fill out the membership blank on the back. And if you want your qualifications validated or anything like that so you'll have something – well you can get one of those too. I am not urging that upon you in any way. It doesn't cost you anything.

Now, America is realizing at this time, perhaps a little late, that it should do something to or about or with the national government. People who never thought about the national government, are now talking about it and thinking about it and worrying about it.

I think if we get an agreement on this – we get a show on the road, I think that mental practice in the United States can be something to be proud of instead of something to be ashamed of.

Businessmen have to take it into their computations in order to pilot their businesses, which is quite interesting. You have to figure out which way this cat is going to jump in order to plot the steps of your near future. Well, nobody ever really had to do that before. Well, that says that the determinism of the government is greater than the determinism of the people, and certainly greater than the determinism of an individual.

And I think that unless we get something like high ethical practice going in the United States that the science of the mind is doomed. It won't last out public opinion when the public finds out.

The best thing to do is just to have a higher determinism than the government. And you yourself can do it all by yourself – you!

Therefore, for self-preservation and all other reasons, I recommend to you the National Academy of American Psychology, and I hope you do well with it.

It's an awful hard job to hold thetans down; they are pretty powerful critters. You have to give them lots of barriers. You have to keep convincing them they are tiny and frail. You have to keep putting your heel on their necks, and to do that you have to give them necks, in order to hold them down.

Thank you.

Because anyone amongst you has the power of licking this whole problem if you felt you could raise your head sufficiently to do so. Rather interesting thought isn't it?

[End of lecture]

Perhaps you quail before the responsibility of taking that much responsibility.

The Asian has already invented a mechanism to keep anybody from taking any responsibility. If you save a Chinaman's life out of the Hwang Pu River, you are now responsible for everything else he does. And this is wrong to the Chinese! And they are a nation of slaves. I don't know what is wrong with being responsible for everything else the guy did.

Karma – what's wrong with karma? A Dianeticist can erase it. What's wrong with being responsible for things other than yourself? Well, you have to decide that that is wrong before anything can be wrong with it.

If you want a third dynamic to occur in the country, I think it'd have its best chance – I think it would easily have its best chance if the people right here in this room right now, made up their mind to, or decided to get processed up to an area of responsibility. That is to say: "Responsible for self and others," or "What could you be responsible for?" "What are you willing to be responsible for?" And get this solved in terms of national government, your willingness to participate, your willingness to create a third dynamic.

Maybe it's the first time since Paul Revere went screaming up and down the highways saying, "The British are coming," and thus united, at least in poetry, the American idea of gung-ho – working together.

Well, they worked together enough to knock out George III, but it couldn't have been very tough because George was crazy at the time. By the way, yesterday on my tiepin I was wearing his head – a little guinea with George the III's head on it. I found in England. I thought it was time somebody brought his head home. But we could unite at this high level of emergency and get something done.

I actually see no reason why we cannot unite just because it's good sense. I see no reason why you couldn't take responsibility not only for yourself, but for others. And I see no reason why starting right from here it would not be possible to build a third dynamic in America.

I hope it can be done.

Thank you.

[end of lecture]