
|
|
Lecture: Psychosomatic: Its Meaning In Scientology |
|
|
|
|
Ron the Psychiatrist
|
|
Hubbard contrasts the state of mental therapy in 1964 with his training from Commander Joseph Cheesman Thompson, supposedly a personal student of Freud. Discusses how Thompson trained his cat Psycho with Pavlovian methods. Says Thompson taught him word association.
There practically is no practice of Freudian analysis. They practice things like Horney and other squirrel
offbeat things and so forth. And perhaps Freud could produce a finite result in the field of the mind. And I
know, having been trained to some degree by Commander Thompson, who was trained by Freud, I
know very well that Commander Thompson could do some very wild things. He’d do such things as train
cats and things like this. It was pretty wild.
I know that doesn’t sound like much, but you really have to have a command of the mind to train a cat.
He had a cat he called Psycho. And this cat would do most anything, on command. And it was quite wild,
quite fantastic. And the way he trained the cat was directly from knowledge of the mind. He’d wait until
the cat did something and then reward it. Now, of course here was a basic student also of Pavlov at work,
you see. They’d forgotten the other half of Pavlov’s work: What you must do is punish only, they think.
But he would - he’d just use straight reward. He’d wait for the cat to do something, like jump up on a
chair. And then he would say the command word and reward the cat. And he eventually had the cat so the
cat would - you - he’d say, “Jump up on the chair,” and the cat would jump up on a chair. And this really
made everybody blink. And the cat could do a lot of these silly little tricks.
But there was just an applied piece of the field of the mind, do you see? Directly. He for instance told me
things which I have never since found in any of the written works. It’s quite interesting, these little bits of missing information which go to make up the body of data which becomes a practice are mostly, I think to
a large extent, missing. Because they’re the word - of - mouth things you pick up around the joint, you
know?
He taught me things about association that I don’t find - I find association is something else in the
Freudian texts. But association, the concatenation of association whereby a person is actually able to
arrive at some conclusion. I say concatenation, I really mean a string of things. And the association by
libido theory of course is short - circuited onto the second dynamic, so that the person has certain things
he associates with certain things which then these certain things being the woof and warp of his neurosis
and psychosis - then his neurosis or psychosis is recognizable by what he has associated with what, you
understand? Word association tests, in other words, and so forth. 1
Now, some of this has survived through Freudian lines and they do talk about it, but not to the extent that
Thompson talked about it. He talked about other things. He talked about a diagnosis of the actual incident
through not just listening for five hundred hours to the patient, you see, but actually finding out what he
associated with what. And this required a very active and imaginative practitioner. But you could see that
a practice of this character whereby you sort of have to get an idea of what’s wrong with the bloke, and
then you have to look around and find things for him to pick up and ask him what comes to his mind
instantly, you see, and you would arrive with this trauma.
Now, Freud didn’t have in mind four or five years of an hour per week, you see, he didn’t have this in
mind, this wasn’t his idea of a treatment. But this other is so imaginative, you see.
— L. Ron Hubbard
Lecture 30 July 1964: Psychosomatic: Its Meaning In Society
1Hubbard may have received word association therapy from Commander Thompson for his childhood mental problems. From Hubbard's self-affirmations written ca. 1946:
I have a very bad masturbatory history. I was taught when I was 11 and, despite guilt, fear of insanity, etc. etc. I persisted. At a physical examination at a Y when I was about 13, the examiner and the people with him called me out of the line because my testicles hung low and cautioned me about what would happen if I kept on masturbating. This "discovery" was a bad shock to me.
I had to be so silent about it that now when a bedspring squeaks I lose all libido. I eventually found out I would not be insane, or injure myself but the scars remain.
|
|
|
Lecture: Psychosomatic: Its Meaning In Scientology |
|
|
|
|
Snake Thompson
|
|
Hubbard contrasts the state of mental therapy in 1964 with his training from Commander Joseph Cheesman Thompson, supposedly a personal student of Freud. Discusses how Thompson trained his cat Psycho with Pavlovian methods. Says Thompson taught him word association.
There practically is no practice of Freudian analysis. They practice things like Horney and other squirrel
offbeat things and so forth. And perhaps Freud could produce a finite result in the field of the mind. And I
know, having been trained to some degree by Commander Thompson, who was trained by Freud, I
know very well that Commander Thompson could do some very wild things. He’d do such things as train
cats and things like this. It was pretty wild.
I know that doesn’t sound like much, but you really have to have a command of the mind to train a cat.
He had a cat he called Psycho. And this cat would do most anything, on command. And it was quite wild,
quite fantastic. And the way he trained the cat was directly from knowledge of the mind. He’d wait until
the cat did something and then reward it. Now, of course here was a basic student also of Pavlov at work,
you see. They’d forgotten the other half of Pavlov’s work: What you must do is punish only, they think.
But he would - he’d just use straight reward. He’d wait for the cat to do something, like jump up on a
chair. And then he would say the command word and reward the cat. And he eventually had the cat so the
cat would - you - he’d say, “Jump up on the chair,” and the cat would jump up on a chair. And this really
made everybody blink. And the cat could do a lot of these silly little tricks.
But there was just an applied piece of the field of the mind, do you see? Directly. He for instance told me
things which I have never since found in any of the written works. It’s quite interesting, these little bits of missing information which go to make up the body of data which becomes a practice are mostly, I think to
a large extent, missing. Because they’re the word - of - mouth things you pick up around the joint, you
know?
He taught me things about association that I don’t find - I find association is something else in the
Freudian texts. But association, the concatenation of association whereby a person is actually able to
arrive at some conclusion. I say concatenation, I really mean a string of things. And the association by
libido theory of course is short - circuited onto the second dynamic, so that the person has certain things
he associates with certain things which then these certain things being the woof and warp of his neurosis
and psychosis - then his neurosis or psychosis is recognizable by what he has associated with what, you
understand? Word association tests, in other words, and so forth. 1
Now, some of this has survived through Freudian lines and they do talk about it, but not to the extent that
Thompson talked about it. He talked about other things. He talked about a diagnosis of the actual incident
through not just listening for five hundred hours to the patient, you see, but actually finding out what he
associated with what. And this required a very active and imaginative practitioner. But you could see that
a practice of this character whereby you sort of have to get an idea of what’s wrong with the bloke, and
then you have to look around and find things for him to pick up and ask him what comes to his mind
instantly, you see, and you would arrive with this trauma.
Now, Freud didn’t have in mind four or five years of an hour per week, you see, he didn’t have this in
mind, this wasn’t his idea of a treatment. But this other is so imaginative, you see.
— L. Ron Hubbard
Lecture 30 July 1964: Psychosomatic: Its Meaning In Society
1Hubbard may have received word association therapy from Commander Thompson for his childhood mental problems. From Hubbard's self-affirmations written ca. 1946:
I have a very bad masturbatory history. I was taught when I was 11 and, despite guilt, fear of insanity, etc. etc. I persisted. At a physical examination at a Y when I was about 13, the examiner and the people with him called me out of the line because my testicles hung low and cautioned me about what would happen if I kept on masturbating. This "discovery" was a bad shock to me.
I had to be so silent about it that now when a bedspring squeaks I lose all libido. I eventually found out I would not be insane, or injure myself but the scars remain.
|
|
|
Lecture: Study: Gradients and Nomenclature |
|
|
|
|
The Old Man's Case Book
|
|
While discussing his technology for clearing up misunderstood words, Hubbard claims he learned about association of words from Commander Thompson.
What is the meaning of the word ‘disability’?”
“Oh, well, Christ! Nobody could define ‘disability’!”
You got the idea? It isn’t even that any big mental quirk sits behind it. No vast amount of case has to be
taken into it. He just doesn’t dig this word, man! Why he doesn’t dig it, we don’t even care, but he
doesn’t.
Now, what’s very interesting is this is one of the first points of research, 1947, is the influence of a
mislearned word on a life and that was the point of research. I’d picked up some of this from Commander
Thompson on association of words and there are numerous other things about this, but I had jumped to an
unreasonable assumption about this. As far as I was concerned it was relatively provable or unprovable,
but it was relatively nowhere. They talked about association, they talked about this, they talked about that.
Then I assumed, “Then it must be that a word will make somebody sick.” Well, what could be wrong
with a word?
So I started tracing backwards and getting people to redefine words and that sort of thing.
— L. Ron Hubbard
Lecture 06 August 1964: Study: Gradients and Nomenclature
|
|
|
Lecture: Study: Gradients and Nomenclature |
|
|
|
|
Snake Thompson
|
|
While discussing his technology for clearing up misunderstood words, Hubbard claims he learned about association of words from Commander Thompson.
What is the meaning of the word ‘disability’?”
“Oh, well, Christ! Nobody could define ‘disability’!”
You got the idea? It isn’t even that any big mental quirk sits behind it. No vast amount of case has to be
taken into it. He just doesn’t dig this word, man! Why he doesn’t dig it, we don’t even care, but he
doesn’t.
Now, what’s very interesting is this is one of the first points of research, 1947, is the influence of a
mislearned word on a life and that was the point of research. I’d picked up some of this from Commander
Thompson on association of words and there are numerous other things about this, but I had jumped to an
unreasonable assumption about this. As far as I was concerned it was relatively provable or unprovable,
but it was relatively nowhere. They talked about association, they talked about this, they talked about that.
Then I assumed, “Then it must be that a word will make somebody sick.” Well, what could be wrong
with a word?
So I started tracing backwards and getting people to redefine words and that sort of thing.
— L. Ron Hubbard
Lecture 06 August 1964: Study: Gradients and Nomenclature
|
|
|
PAB: A Critique on Psychoanalysis |
|
|
|
|
Snake Thompson
|
|
Hubbard discusses the origins of Dianetics and Scientology, and claims a direct connection to Sigmund Freud through his friend, mentor and supposedly analyst, Commander Joseph Cheesman Thompson. Hubbard attributes his definition of transference to Thompson. Claims he has "bettered the results of Freud."
It is necessary to understand first that we are actually indebted to psychoanalysis
and its originator, the debarred doctor, Sigmund Freud. My basic, if unappreciated,
education in the field of the mind came from Commander Thompson of the Medical
Corps of the U.S. Navy, who was Freud’s personal student. Better than others, then,
some sixty-two years after Freud’s original declarations, I could be considered
qualified to criticize the failure of not only the basic work of Freud but the later
offshoots which, while following his original tenets, yet sought to expand information
on psychoanalysis. Very few living analysts today have as direct a connection with the subject as I do and there are few who can boast of the successes with the subject which I can. For I have used psychoanalysis as a practitioner and have achieved some certain successes with it, were one to call a success the sporadic eradication of the severe neurosis in a known mental patient. Further, there is my own enfranchisement by the Freudians when they were all but obliterated in Europe by Russia.
Having established then my possible qualifications to criticize and having compounded such right by having bettered the results of Freud, I feel it is necessary to overhaul rapidly the points of failure of psychoanalysis as we understand the mind today.
[...]
TRANSFERENCE
We find another error in psychoanalysis under the heading of “transference.” The
actual definition of “transference” in psychoanalysis is sufficiently unstable to bring
about considerable argument as to what is meant by transference. In fact, in Dianetics
we had to reestablish an entirely different condition which we called “valences” to
denote the shift from one’s own personality into that of another.
Transference in psychoanalysis was used to denote the transference of the patient
into the valence of the practitioner. This was the way which Commander Thompson
described the phenomenon to me and nothing has been learnt from later analysts to
disprove this basic definition of Freud’s.
—L. Ron Hubbard
PAB 92 10 July 1956 A Critique of Psychoanalysis
|
|
|
|
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>
|
| Results 46 - 54 of 401 |