Author: Hubbard, L. R.
Book title: Dianetics: The Evolution of a Science
Publication date: 1950
Location: Los Angeles
Publisher: Bridge Publications, Inc.
Description: Hubbard writes that he reviewed Pavlov, Jung, Adler and Freud in his research and development of Dianetics.
First we divided what we could probably think about and had to think about from what we probably didn’t have to think about, for purposes of our solution. Next we had to think about all men. Then a few men. Finally the individual man and at last a portion of the aberrative pattern of an individual man.
How did the exterior world become an interior aberration?
There were many false starts and blind passages just as there had been in determining what an optimum brain would be. There were still so many variables and possible erroneous combinations in the computation that it looked like something out of Kant. But there is no argument with results. There is no substitute for a bridge heavy enough to hold a train.
I tried, on the off-chance that they might be right, several schools of psychology– Jung, Adler. Even Freud. But not very seriously because over half the patients on the rolls had been given very extensive courses in psycho-analysis by experts, with no great results. The work of Pavlov was reviewed in case there was something there. But men aren’t dogs. Looking back on these people’s work now, a lot of things they did made sense. But reading their work and using it when one did not know, they didn’t make sense, from which can be concluded that rear-view mirrors six feet wide tell more to a man who is driving with a peephole in front than he knew when he was approaching an object.
Hubbard. (1950). Dianetics: The Evolution of a Science (2007 ed., pp. 36-37). Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.