Vinaire's Blog
… The Book of Religions → JUDAISM
… The Book of Philosophy → PLATO
… Eddington: Physics → Eddington 1927
… Scientology OT Levels → NOTs
… The L Processes → L11
.
Reference: Postulate Mechanics
Creator-creation is a common dichotomy in this universe. Our mom bakes a cake. Mom is the creator; cake is the creation. It is a simple concept. But how far back can we take this concept?
There is creation. There is no doubt about it. The simplest of creations is a consideration. Each time we consider something, we create a consideration. You consider, “We shall establish a base on moon by 2035.” And you have created this consideration.
Who are “we” that creates the consideration? We consider each one of us to be a self. It is the self that creates the consideration. Then we ask, “Who created self?” Or, “How was self created?”
We find that everybody thinks that God created self. Then we ask, “Who created God?” Or, “How was God created?”
We discover the belief that God has created the world, but God is not created by anyone. It is possible that God may have created itself. The bottom line is that God’s existence is simply taken for granted. That makes it a postulate, because a postulate is something that is taken for granted. In that case, we ask, “How does a postulate come about?”
We find that some process of reasoning underlies all considerations, such as, “Joe is a good person.” That reasoning must begin from a postulate, such as, “God creates only good things.” There is nothing beyond that postulate to reason from. The source of postulates is simply “unknowable.”
But that unknowable is not just another consideration. The fact is that we simply don’t know.
So, whichever way we look at creation, and try to think of the ultimate creator, we run into “unknowable.” We may say God is this unknowable, but we are simply assigning the symbol of God to unknowable.
Every religion has its own symbol for the Creator, which may only represent the “unknowable.” The religion then postulates attributes to make that Creator knowable.
In the ancient Vedic religions, such as, Hinduism, the Nirākār Brahman uses Māyā to arise as Sākār Brahman. The Nirākār Brahman is considered to be a reality without attributes. Māyā is considered to be the process that generates attributes. And Sākār Brahman is considered to be the reality with attributes.
Therefore, we may consider God in Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) to be “Sākār Brahman”—a reality with attributes. The attribute of omniscient (all-knowing) is then assigned to God. But all such attributes are brought about by “Māyā,” or postulates. And the ultimate source of these postulates is unknowable.
From this it follows that, not only the ultimate Creator, but also the ultimate CAUSE of these postulates is unknowable. Like “Creator-creation,” “Cause-effect” is also a dichotomy, which makes sense within the universe, but when it is applied to the whole universe, we do not find an answer.
That means, we can know this universe only by discovering the actual postulates that create it bit by bit, layer by layer. There is no single creator of this universe.
That is the search for postulates, which this book is engaged in.
.
The major concepts introduced in Chapter 1 are CREATOR-CREATION, DICHOTOMY, GOD, VEDIC RELIGIONS, and ABRAHAMIC RELIGIONS. These concepts are defined in Glossary: Postulate Mechanics.
PM Postulate 1.1: There is no single creator of this universe.
PM Postulate 1.2: The “Creator” or “Cause” of this world are postulates.
PM Postulate 1.3: The source of postulates is unknowable.
PM Postulate 1.4: Jesus and Krishna are symbols applied to the unknowable.
PM Postulate 1.5: To understand this universe we must discover the actual postulates.
.
Reference: Postulate Mechanics
When the subject is the whole universe, what is the starting point from which to begin clearing any misconceptions? There are all kinds of theories available about the universe in religion, philosophy and science. The sciences study matter and try to describe a physical universe. The religions study life and try to describe a spiritual universe. Philosophy speculates upon all things unknown.
I decided that the first concept to clear would be the meaning of UNIVERSE.
It is always beneficial to start with the etymology or origin of a word to get some idea of its derivation and history. This provided me for the universe, a sense of “all things combined into one.”
What is that characteristic that combines all things into one?
The answer seemed to be “the common characteristic is that we know them.” We know that there is a physical universe and a spiritual universe. What combines them is that we know both of them. So, the characteristic that combines all things into one is that they are knowable.
What is the unknowable then? What cannot be considered a part of this universe?
Here the penny dropped. We cannot even consider the unknowable because it is unknowable. The moment we consider something we know that consideration. Even God is knowable because we assign God all these wonderful attributes. My first realization was that the fundamental dichotomy is UNKNOWABLE-KNOWABLE. Both spiritual and physical aspects of the universe are knowable simply because we have considered them. The highest echelon concept was UNKNOWABLE. This was supported by The Creation Hymn of Rig Veda.
So, how do we come to know? How do we know anything?
We know something because we have considered it. That consideration must have some postulate at the bottom of it somewhere. All considerations are the result of reasoning from some postulate—thing that we take for granted—isn’t it?
We sense this universe because it is substantial, and we give meaning to those sensations by postulating what that sensation is. This is then followed by different sensations and different postulates arising for them. All these sensations and postulates then must come together in a way that they make sense. We may call this the process of assimilation. This assimilation leads to the perception of what is there. Thus comes about the consciousness of the knowable universe.
This was excellent sleuthing. These ideas did not appear overnight. A lot of study preceded them. But everything I studied pointed to the above conclusions. Furthermore, these postulates were not quite visible. But, at least, they were there, and they were knowable.
And so, a hunt for those postulates began.
This endeavor give this book its title: POSTULATE MECHANICS, which is abbreviated as “PM.”
For the “matter” we have Classical Mechanics. For the “radiation” we have Quantum Mechanics. For the “thought” (which includes the search for fundamental postulates), we now propose Postulate Mechanics.
The purpose of Postulate Mechanics is to investigate, in a scientific manner, the postulates underlying this universe. It uses the technique of Subject Clearing to do so. The definitions of concepts, as found during this search, are being compiled at Glossary: Postulate Mechanics.
This is a live search, and the definitions of the various concepts are continually being refined and updated.
This search makes up the rest of this book.
I hope you enjoy this search.
.
The major concepts introduced in this introduction are UNIVERSE, KNOWABLE, UNKNOWABLE, POSTULATE, CONSIDERATION, and POSTULATE MECHANICS. These concepts are defined in Glossary: Postulate Mechanics.
PM Postulate 0.1: The universe is outcome of the postulates that are knowable.
PM Postulate 0.2: The universe can be sensed because it is knowable.
PM Postulate 0.3: The sensation forms the substance of the universe.
PM Postulate 0.4: The universe makes sense when all its parts are integrated.
PM Postulate 0.5: The integrated Universe may be said to have oneness.
.
When a person finds himself in an environment that makes it difficult for him to reject what he doesn’t like, he is likely to feel very uncomfortable. When this continues, he may become serious, and even neurotic. Getting a person to laugh is always a good remedy because, besides surprise, laughter is rejection. Laughter surprises the person into rejecting, and that is very therapeutic.
The Remedy of Laughter could be entered simply by having the individual predict that a wall would be there in ten seconds, count off ten seconds on his watch, and then ascertain with thoroughness that the wall is still there.
A direct mock up process can be applied to the Remedy of Laughter by having the person mock up alternately himself and others laughing.
The person can also be made simply to stand up and start laughing. He at first will demand to have something to laugh at, but at length will be able to laugh without reason.
The goal of the process is to regain the ability to laugh without reason. One may run this process simply by using the following two commands.
‘Start laughing.’
‘Keep on laughing.’
.
Here is the full excerpt of this Scientology process from the Book, The Creation of Human Ability by L. Ron Hubbard.
R2-26: REMEDY OF LAUGHTER
The earliest known psychotherapy consisted of getting a patient to laugh. Laughter is rejection. A preclear being continually inflowed upon by the physical universe at length may find it difficult to reject anything. Getting him to reject something could be made an auditing goal. The best manifestation of this is laughter. Laughter includes both surprise and rejection. The individual is surprised into rejecting.
In order to laugh, he must have laid aside some of his ability to predict. An individual who is serious has laid aside so much of his ability to predict that he now cannot be surprised into rejection. The anatomy of mystery consists of, in this order, unpredictability, confusion, and chaos covered up because it cannot be tolerated. Therefore, this is also the anatomy of problems. Problems always begin with an unpredictability, deteriorate into a confusion, and then if still unsolved become a mystery which is massed confusion. It will be observed that as a person falls further and further away from the ability to laugh he becomes more and more confused until at last he sees no points in any jokes, he sees only embarrassment when confronted by laughter, and the whole action of laughter itself escapes him. The ability to laugh is rehabilitated in general by Scientology as it advances the ability of the preclear to know – which is to say, predict.
The Remedy of Laughter could be entered simply by having the individual predict that a wall would be there in ten seconds, count off ten seconds on his watch, and then ascertain with thoroughness that the wall is still there, to establish if the wall is there, then to predict that it will be there in ten seconds, then to count off ten seconds on his watch and ascertain if the wall is still there. By thus bringing solid objects into the realm of prediction, an individual at length comes to a point where he can predict very slowly moving objects. A cheap train and track could be set up for this purpose and the preclear could be led to predict with accuracy the position of engines on the small circular track. However, the preclear can be made to watch automobiles on the street – a process which serves just as well with no such equipment.
The preclear would then be led to predict the positions of his own body, first by predicting that it was going to be in a certain spot, then moving it there and seeing whether or not it had arrived at that spot. He would then be brought to swing his arm in a circle, predict that it would swing faster, and swing it faster. And thus being led to predict the motion of his body with these simplicities, he could be exercised in making his body go tense and go limp by his command until he was thoroughly certain that he could both predict the tension or relaxation by doing it. Then he could be led to predict the positions of people walking on the street until he felt some security in predicting without exercising physical control. By thus remedying his ability to predict, one brings the preclear up into a tolerance of motion. He is then led to put his attention on one moving object, then on two moving objects at once, and so forth using the processes of spanning attention on moving objects.
A direct mock up process can be applied to the Remedy of Laughter by having the preclear mock up alternately himself and others laughing or by having him mock up an acceptable level of amusement and remedy his havingness with it until he can have people laughing very broadly in his mock-ups. The preclear can also be made simply to stand up and start laughing. He at first will demand to have something to laugh at, but at length will be able to laugh without reason. The goal of the process is contained in the last line – to regain the ability to laugh without reason.
In this Intensive Procedure only two steps are employed to remedy laughter. The first consists of these commands, ‘Be completely certain that the wall is there’. And when the preclear has become with considerable conversation completely certain that the wall is there, touching it, pushing against it, and so forth, the auditor then says, ‘Sit down, take this (your) watch’, ‘Now predict that the wall will be there ten seconds from now’, ‘Have you done so?’ ‘All right wait ten seconds by your watch’. And when this is done, ‘Is the wall still there?’ And when the preclear has answered, ‘Now make absolutely certain the wall is there’ and the preclear does so by touching it, pushing at it, kicking it. ‘Now make very sure that the wall is there’. And when the preclear very vigorously has done so, ‘Now predict that it will be there in ten seconds’. And when the preclear has done so, the remainder of the commands are given and this is repeated over and over.
Then the second part of lntensive Procedure’s process of laughter, but only after the preclear has experienced considerable relief and is absolutely sure that he can predict that all parts of the room will be there, not only in ten seconds, but in an hour – although no such timing is used, and only ten seconds of time is employed – ‘Start laughing’. And no matter what the preclear says thereafter, or what arguments he advances, or how many things he asks about, or how many reasons he wants or gives, the auditor merely says (adding words that urge the preclear), ‘Start laughing’. And when the preclear at length does so, no matter how half heartedly, ‘Keep on laughing’. The two commands which are used in addition to words necessary to urge the preclear without giving the preclear any reason whatsoever are, ‘Start laughing’ and ‘Keep on laughing’.
This process is then done until the preclear can actually enjoy a laugh without any reason whatsoever, without believing that laughing without reason is insane, without feeling self-conscious about laughing, and without needing any boost from the auditor. The auditor in this second part need take no pains to agree with the preclear by laughing. He need not chuckle or smile nor need he even particularly act seriously, his laughter is not needed or used in the process. An auditor can be as serious as he pleases, and indeed, if he wishes to do so, can be even more serious than is usual when running this second step of R2-26.
In earlier Scientology it was learned that serious preclears would often recover considerable ground simply when they were made to do things without any reason whatsoever. This achievement is much greater when they are made to laugh without any reason.
.
Reference: SC: Psychology
NOTE: Text in color contains Vinaire’s comments.
.
Western and Eastern traditions diverged fundamentally in their conceptualization of self and consciousness. Western thought, particularly after Descartes, increasingly adopted substance dualism, treating mind and body as distinct entities requiring connection. Eastern traditions maintained holistic monism, viewing psyche as inherently embodied and integrated with physical and spiritual dimensions.
.
The West progressively prioritized empirical observation and rational analysis, with Vives’s inductive methods and Enlightenment experimentalism establishing psychology’s scientific trajectory. Eastern approaches emphasized introspection, meditative practice, and holistic observation, with Indian yoga and Chinese dialectical analysis providing systematic introspective methodologies.
.
Medieval Western thought treated emotions as physiological-psychological responses requiring rational direction. Islamic psychology similarly viewed emotions as natural responses needing cultivation through virtue ethics. Indian psychology identified emotions as expressions of manas and hrdaya, requiring equanimity rather than control. Chinese philosophy developed polarity theories, understanding emotions as manifestations of qing requiring balance between Confucian cultivation and Taoist naturalness.
.
Western approaches evolved from supernatural explanations toward medical models, with compassionate care replacing harsh treatment by the 18th century. Islamic psychology maintained holistic treatment combining physical, psychological, and spiritual interventions throughout the period. Indian and Chinese traditions developed sophisticated psychotherapeutic techniques emphasizing meditation, lifestyle modification, and restoration of balance.
.
Western consciousness theory progressed from Ockham’s intuitive cognition to Descartes’s cogito, emphasizing self-awareness as rational certainty. Eastern traditions explored altered states (Indian turiya, Buddhist jhānas) and developed detailed cartographies of consciousness levels, with Islamic mystics (Sufis) mapping spiritual stations (maqāmāt) of self-transformation.
.
The 11th–18th centuries established foundational frameworks that continue shaping contemporary psychology. Western development demonstrated increasing methodological rigor and scientific orientation, moving from theological to naturalistic explanations. Eastern traditions maintained holistic integration, developing sophisticated wellness models that modern psychology has only recently begun to appreciate. The period’s most enduring contribution may be the diversity of psychological paradigms it produced—demonstrating that human consciousness can be understood through multiple valid frameworks, each offering distinctive insights into the complex relationship between mind, body, and society.
This comparative history reveals that psychology’s “progress” is not linear but multidimensional, with different civilizations developing complementary approaches to understanding human nature. The 18th century’s synthesis of empirical method and holistic concern prefigured psychology’s ongoing integration of biological, psychological, and social dimensions—a reconciliation of insights that Eastern traditions never divided.
The Western psychology focuses on individuality; whereas the Eastern psychology focuses on attaining universal consciousness. The contradiction between these two goals is seen in Scientology. This contradiction, however, is handled in Postulate Mechanics.
.
Reference: SC: Psychology
NOTE: Text in color contains Vinaire’s comments.
.
Islamic psychology (ʿilm al-nafs—science of the self/psyche) developed a sophisticated holistic model integrating Greek philosophy, Qur’anic principles, and clinical observation. This tradition emphasized the inseparability of mental health, physical wellbeing, and spiritual practice.
Conceptual Framework: Muslim scholars used nafs (self/personality) and fitrah (human nature) to denote psychological constructs, encompassing qalb (heart), ruh (soul), aql (intellect), and irada (will). Mental illness was designated A‘ilaj al-nafs (treatment of the soul), al-tibb al-ruhani (spiritual health), or tibb al-qalb (mental medicine).
Key Contributors:
Al-Ghazali (c. 1058–1111): The 11th-century mujaddid (renewer of faith) systematized Islamic psychology in his Iḥyā’ ‘ulūm ad-dīn (Revival of Religious Sciences). He developed a structural theory of the psyche based on Qur’anic exegesis, analyzing the soul’s faculties and their role in moral development. His tripartite division of the soul—rational, concupiscent (desire), and irascible (anger)—employed the rider-horse-dog metaphor from Greek philosophy, with the rational faculty controlling lower faculties to achieve cardinal virtues. Al-Ghazali’s psychological crisis and recovery, documented in his autobiographical writings, provided profound insights into consciousness, anxiety, and spiritual transformation.
Ibn Miskawayh (c. 940–1030): This 10th-century philosopher pioneered therapeutic techniques including “self-reinforcement” and response-cost mechanisms. His Tahdhib al-Aklaq (Refinement of Character) outlined rules for moral health analogous to medical regimens for physical health, harmonizing Platonic, Aristotelian, Stoic, and Neoplatonic virtues within Islamic culture. Miskawayh emphasized bodily practices, habituation of appetites, and social dimensions of virtue cultivation.
Clinical Innovations: Islamic psychologists implemented expressive therapies using music and olfactory stimulation to engage sensory functions in healing. They recognized curative potential in therapeutic relationships and emphasized positive reinforcement. Al-Razi (864–932) advocated relational skills to ease healing, while physicians like Constantinus Africanus (11th century) translated Arabic texts emphasizing physical cures for melancholia.
Islamic psychologists implemented expressive therapies using music and olfactory stimulation to engage sensory functions in healing. They believed in the inseparability of mental health, physical wellbeing, and spiritual practice; and rational faculty controlling lower faculties to achieve cardinal virtues. Rules were outlined for moral health analogous to medical regimens for physical health.
.
Indian psychological thought during this period refined ancient Vedic and Buddhist insights into consciousness, developing sophisticated mental health practices that recognized subconscious influences and therapeutic concentration.
Core Concepts: Indian psychology identified manas (mind/heart) as the center for emotions like fear, with the heart (hrdaya) representing the source of involuntary, irrational psychological processes. The manas operated in multiple states: waking, dreaming, deep sleep (sushupti), and transcendent consciousness (turiya), the latter achieved through meditation rather than ordinary transition.
Mental Health Theory: Ancient texts described unmad (psychosis) with etiologies suggesting both organic (worms, fever) and functional origins, demonstrating nuanced diagnostic understanding. Mental suffering was analyzed through concepts like tapas of manas—maintaining the mind as happy, kind, silent, self-controlled, and pure. The Bhagavad Gita emphasized equanimity (samatva) as essential for mental health, establishing that balanced mind establishes connection with ultimate reality (brahman).
Therapeutic Methods: Yoga systems provided comprehensive frameworks for mental health, recognizing concentration as the means to perceive truth and understanding the mind-body connection. Psychotherapeutic techniques appeared throughout ancient literature, emphasizing meditation, emotional regulation, and cultivation of virtues. Indian psychologists identified subconscious forces as potent determinants of conscious tendencies, anticipating Freudian insights by centuries.
Philosophical Developments: Thinkers systematically analyzed mental tendencies, rejecting theories of innate destructiveness. They concluded that human nature fundamentally seeks eternal happiness and existence, contrasting with Western psychoanalytic emphasis on death drives.
According to Indian psychological thought, human nature fundamentally seeks eternal happiness and existence. But subconscious forces are potent determinants of conscious tendencies. Psychotherapeutic techniques emphasized meditation, emotional regulation, cultivation of virtues, and equanimity.
.
Chinese psychological thought integrated Confucian social ethics, Taoist naturalism, and Buddhist introspection, creating distinctive frameworks for understanding human development and mental life.
Theoretical Integration: From the 11th–13th centuries, Chinese philosophy synthesized key concepts—qi (vital energy), yin-yang polarity, wuxing (five phases), and li (principle)—into comprehensive psychological models. This integration created dialectical explanations of behavior emphasizing balance and harmony.
Core Frameworks:
Confucian Psychology: Confucianism centered psychological development on moral cultivation within social relationships. The concept of qing (情) evolved from denoting objective reality to encompass subjective feelings and emotions, particularly during the Warring States period. Mencius’s theory of innate goodness provided foundation for understanding moral emotions, while Xunzi’s counter-argument emphasized cultivation over nature.
Taoist Naturalism: Taoist thinkers viewed human nature as simple and good, arguing that acquired ideas and moralities damage innate purity. Psychological health required purging desires and returning to natural spontaneity, contrasting with Confucian emphasis on cultivated virtue.
Buddhist Influence: Buddhism introduced Indo-European psychological theory, facilitating understanding of mind from representational states perspective. This imported framework enabled new conceptualizations of qing as subjective feelings, revolutionizing Chinese emotion theory.
Brain-Central Theory: Chinese medicine developed sophisticated brain-centered theories of mental function, articulated through the yīn yáng wu˘ xíng framework and heart-central theory. These models emphasized physiological-psychological integration centuries before Western equivalences.
Chinese psychological thought integrated moral cultivation within social relationships with innate purity and mental representations. It synthesized key concepts—qi (vital energy), yin-yang polarity, wuxing (five phases), and li (principle)—into comprehensive psychological models. Chinese medicine developed sophisticated brain-centered theories of mental function.
.
