In 1950, Dianetics was released becoming one of the most controversial and best selling books on the mind ever. Well I've finally got around to reading it for myself, and as a favor to anyone interested, I'm going to quickly share some of the highlights. In addition, we'll take a look at how some of the controversial information released 60 years ago in this book stands up to modern science.
Firstly, it should be noted that the author states in the last chapter, that Dianetics is not complete, and that he expects others to continue to study and improve upon his own findings. He also gives credit to dozens of authors and thousands of years of research by others, rather than claiming to be the first one to study the mind. However, he points out that some of the greatest discoveries of the past, which he used to develop Dianetics, came from people who also believed things that were found to be totally wrong. Therefore, the aim of the book is not so much on claiming to be the alpha and omega of information on the mind (as I'd previously been told). Instead the aim of the book is to determine and develop the most valuable information on the mind in regards to improving our society.
So what are some of the controversial statements found in Dianetics, and how do they stand up against modern popular science?
The main concern of the book is that individuals are not always acting in a reasonable fashion. More specifically, a part of the human mind that evolved to help us survive has outgrown it's usefulness. This part, the "reactive mind", takes over the rational part (termed the analytical mind), when it receives cues that the person's survival is being threatened. The problem is that the "reactive mind" is irrational, compelling the individual to do very strange things as a defense mechanism against whatever the perceived threat is.
The "reactive mind" grows from moments of pain and loss, which it irrationally associates with whatever was in the person's environment during those moments. As experiences differ, some people will have more of a reactive mind than others. As environments differ, some people will be compelled to have their "reactive mind" take over more than others. There is a lot more to the book, but this is my brief insight into the basic concept of Dianetics. Of course more interestingly, a method of overcoming the "reactive mind" is detailed in the book.
So how valid are the controversial claims of Dianetics? Let's take a look at a few.
1. That people sometimes do irrational things, that they did not plan to do, and that they actually regret doing, is one of the main concepts. Most notable in this concept, is the idea that some people will find themselves chronically (on an ongoing basis) behaving in a way that they really do not want to. Those people would very much like to change their behavior, but despite their desire, cannot do so.
- You may have heard people utter the expressions, "Why did I do that?", "Why do I keep doing that?", or "Sorry, I wasn't in my right mind.", but let's take a look at what modern science has to say:
The National Institute on Drug Abuse notes:
The initial decision to take drugs is mostly voluntary. However, when drug abuse takes over, a person's ability to exert self control can become seriously impaired. Brain imaging studies from drug-addicted individuals show physical changes in areas of the brain that are critical to judgment, decisionmaking, learning and memory, and behavior control.
and also notes:
As with any other disease, vulnerability to addiction differs from person to person.
the Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence, in the paper "What Works in Reducing
Adolescent Violence: An Empirical Review of the Field" notes 4 patterns of adolescent violence:
Situational: wherein violence is brought about due to certain environmental conditions
Relationship: wherein violence is occurs mainly between close family members or those who engaged in ongoing relationships with one another
Predatory: wherein violence is perpetrated in as part of criminal activity or to gain something from someone else. According to the paper, "It seems to be predictable, develops slowly over time with onset in early adolescence..."
Psychopathological: wherein the violence is not due to criminal involvement or environment. As noted, "The violence tends to be more repetitive and extreme than other types... Research suggests that such behavior is related to
neural system and severe psychological trauma"
These statements are based on research and statistics, which can be found at the above links, but the first point seems to be valid under science after 60 years:
A significant number of people continue to do things that they, their families, and society in general have found detrimental (even fatal), despite their attempts to stop. Note that drug abuse and violence are only two examples of a plethora of undesired activities. I should also note that Dianetics provides explanations for why irrational behavior would happen more due to the presence of certain familiar substances in the body (drugs or otherwise), or in the presence of certain environmental factors, or in the presence of certain family members, as well as why some irrational behavior would not manifest for years (or ever) after a painful incident, but then quickly become chronic.
I'll mention 2 more controversial highlights in the next post...
No comments:
Post a Comment