Author Archives: vinaire

I am originally from India. I am settled in United States since 1969. I love mathematics, philosophy and clarity in thinking.


Reference: Hubbard 1950: Dianetics TMSMH

These are some comments on the chapter “Summary” from  DIANETICS: THE MODERN SCIENCE OF MENTAL HEALTH.


Comments on

Dianetics needs an update after seventy years. To do so, we need  to move from a human-centric approach to a universal one. The universe has been evolving all along; man is part of that evolution.

Therefore, we need to revise the dynamic principle of existence from survival to evolution.

The goal of man, therefore, is to not necessarily to seek immortally. From a universal approach, the goal of man becomes the broadening the viewpoint to be able to understand the whole universe as it truly is.

Therefore, we need to revise the goal of man from immorality to a STATIC viewpoint from which all MOTION can be viewed as-is.

This requires expanding the viewpoint from self to a universal viewpoint that encompasses the family, the society, the race, mankind, all life, matter and energy.

The update of above fundamental postulates, in alignment with Buddhism, brings many changes to the subject of Dianetics.

The cycle of birth and death is natural in the course of evolution. A life organism must die in order to evolve into a higher form. The natural process of death due to old age need not be painful as talked about in Dianetics. Upon death, the body disintegrates into organic molecules. The molecules come together to form the next iteration of the BODY. The mind also disintegrate into frozen patterns that reside in the organic molecules. These impressions also come together to form the mental matrix in the next iteration of the MIND. The “spirit” is the innate impulse of energy. It animates the next iteration of the BODY-MIND SYSTEM. Any individuality is part of the body-mind system. It evolves as the life organism evolves.

The individual is not immortal. The individuality evolves as the body-mind system evolves. The only eternal element is the subtle energy that energizes the body-mind system.

The urges of man are expressed as the dynamics of self, family, society, race, and mankind. These dynamics evolve from the innate impulse of energy that we see in the properties of matter and in the life activities of all different organisms, such as, plants, insects and animals.

The dynamics align naturally in man as he puts his attention on evolution.

The human mind is engaged in resolving anomalies (inconsistencies, discontinuities and disharmonies). It breaks the incoming perceptions into perceptual elements. These perceptual elements get assimilated into a mental matrix. Thinking occurs as the perceptual elements freely associate themselves in a desired direction. The finer are the perceptual elements, the more analytical is the mind. The perceptions of painful shocks and disorientations are difficult to reduce and assimilate. They fuse themselves with other perceptual elements of the mental matrix. The greater is the fusion of perceptual elements, the more reactive the mind becomes.

Intelligence is the ability of the mind to perceive, pose and resolve anomalies. Alignment of dynamics determines the persistency of the organism in it course of evolution. Both dynamics and intelligence are inhibited by such fusion of perceptual elements; this is the core of aberrations. Aberrations are special type of anomalies because they reduce the ability of the mind to resolve anomalies.

All aberrations arise from the reactivity caused by the fusing of perceptual elements in the mental matrix.

The somatic mind translates the signals from the mind to the body. It may thus contribute to the psychosomatic illnesses caused by aberrations. A training pattern is not an aberration because it is not reactive; it can be changed at will. A habit, on the other hand, is reactive; it is difficult to overcome. Aberrations result in irrational activities. Not all destructive activities are necessarily irrational. The mind is capable of resolving its aberrations and other anomalies in the environment.

As the aberrations are resolved the viewpoint expands. The person moves on the tone scale from apathy to violent effort to mediocre success to overall success and happiness.

Happiness is the joy that comes from resolving aberrations and anomalies.



I am presenting here the axioms of Dianetics, and how they appear when made consistent with Buddhism.


DN AXIOM 41: The cell and virus are the primary building blocks of life organisms.

DN AXIOM 41 (proposed): The innate impulse of energy evolves into “life” when the configurations of virus and cell are reached.


DN AXIOM 42: The virus and cell are matter and energy animated and motivated in space and time by THETA.

DN AXIOM 42 (proposed): The virus and cell then become the building blocks of life organisms.


DN AXIOM 43: THETA mobilizes the virus and cell in colonial aggregations to increase potential motion and accomplish effort.

DN AXIOM 43 (proposed): The virus and cell aggregate into colonies to increase potential motion and accomplish effort.


DN AXIOM 44: The goal of viruses and cells is survival in space through time.

DN AXIOM 44 (proposed): The goal of viruses and cells is to evolve into higher level organisms.


DN AXIOM 45: The total mission of higher organisms, viruses and cells is the same as that of the virus and cell.

DN AXIOM 45 (proposed): The mission at any level of organism is to evolve to a higher level.


DN AXIOM 46: Colonial aggregations of viruses and cells can be imbued with more THETA than they inherently contained.

Life energy joins any group, whether a group of organisms or group of cells composing an organism. Here we have personal entity, individuation, etc.

The innate impulse of energy evolves from inanimate properties of minerals through viruses and cells to animated organisms. Aggregation of animated organisms into colonies that are acting together as a smoothly functioning organization is a step forward in terms of evolution.

DN AXIOM 46 (proposed): Colonial aggregations of viruses and cells acquire greater abilities.


DN AXIOM 47: Effort can be accomplished by LAMBDA only through the coordination of its parts toward goals.

DN AXIOM 47 (proposed): Living organisms put out greater effort toward evolution through the coordination of their parts.


DN AXIOM 48: An organism is equipped to be governed and controlled by a mind.

DN AXIOM 48 (proposed): With evolution the control of an organism get centralized in a mind.


DN AXIOM 49: The purpose of the mind is to pose and resolve problems relating to survival and to direct the effort of the organism according to these solutions.

DN AXIOM 49 (proposed): The purpose of the mind is to keep all perceptions well assimilated so that incoming anomalies can be quickly resolved.


DN AXIOM 50: All problems are posed and resolved through estimations of effort.

DN AXIOM 50 (proposed): All problems are posed and resolved through assimilation of perceptions.


Summary of Axioms

As energy evolves, its inherent impulse evolves too. It evolves into the “life” of the life organisms. “Life” is the coordinated motion of energy forms from the lowest to highest configurations. The center of such coordination of motion appears as the mind. The purpose of the mind becomes the assimilation of all perceptions, and thus, the resolution of anomalies that interfere with that assimilation.


Durant 1926: The Organization of Science (Aristotle)

Reference: The Story of Philosophy

This paper presents Chapter II, Section 4 from the book THE STORY OF PHILOSOPHY by WILL DURANT. The contents are from the 1933 reprint of this book by TIME INCORPORATED by arrangement with Simon and Schuster, Inc.

The paragraphs of the original material (in black) are accompanied by brief comments (in color) based on the present understanding.  Feedback on these comments is appreciated.

The heading below is linked to the original materials.


IV. The Organization of Science 

1. Greek Science Before Aristotle 

“Socrates,” says Renan, “gave philosophy to mankind, and Aristotle gave it science. There was philosophy before Socrates, and science before Aristotle; and since Socrates and since Aristotle, philosophy and science have made immense advances. But all has been built upon the foundation which they laid.” Before Aristotle, science was in embryo; with him it was born.

Earlier civilizations than the Greek had made attempts at science; but so far as we can catch their thought through their still obscure cuneiform and hieroglyphic script, their science was indistinguishable from theology. That is to say, these pre-Hellenic peoples explained every obscure operation in nature by some supernatural agency; everywhere there were gods. Apparently it was the Ionian Greeks who first dared to give natural explanations of cosmic complexities and mysterious events: they sought in physics the natural causes of particular incidents, and in philosophy a natural theory of the whole. Thales (640-550 B. C.), the “Father of Philosophy,” was primarily an astronomer, who astonished the natives of Miletus by informing them that the sun and stars (which they were wont to worship as gods) were merely balls of fire. His pupil Anaximander (610-540 B. C.), the first Greek to make astronomical and geographical charts, believed that the universe had begun as an undifferentiated mass, from which all things had arisen by the separation of opposites; that astronomic history periodically repeated itself in the evolution and dissolution of an infinite number of worlds; that the earth was at rest in space by a balance of internal impulsions (like Buridan’s ass); that all our planets had once been fluid, but had been evaporated by the sun; that life had first been formed in the sea, but had been driven upon the land by the subsidence of the water; that of these stranded animals some had developed the capacity to breathe air, and had so become the progenitors of all later land life; that man could not from the beginning have been what he now was, for if man, on his first appearance, had been so helpless at birth, and had required so long an adolescence, as in these later days, he could not possibly have survived. Anaximenes, another Milesian (fl. 450 B. C.), described the primeval condition of things as a very rarefied mass, gradually condensing into wind, cloud, water, earth, and stone; the three forms of matter—gas, liquid and solid—were progressive stages of condensation; heat and cold were merely rarefaction and condensation; earth-quakes were due to the solidification of an originally fluid earth; life and soul were one, an animating and expansive force present in everything everywhere. Anaxagoras (500-428 B. C.), teacher of Pericles, seems to have given a correct explanation of solar and lunar eclipses; he discovered the processes of respiration in plants and fishes; and he explained man’s intelligence by the power of manipulation that came when the fore-limbs were freed from the tasks of locomotion. Slowly, in these men, knowledge grew into science. 

First scientific advance was from supernatural agency to natural explanations. The first area of investigation was the heavens and then earth, matter and life; and, ultimately, the investigation of man.

Heraclitus (530-470 B. C.), who left wealth and its cares to live a life of poverty and study in the shade of the temple porticoes at Ephesus, turned science from astronomy to earthlier concerns. All things forever flow and change, he said; even in the stillest matter there is unseen flux and movement. Cosmic history runs in repetitious cycles, each beginning and ending in fire (here is one source of the Stoic and Christian doctrine of last judgment and hell). “Through strife,” says Heraclitus, “all things arise and pass away… War is the father and king of all: some he has made gods, and some men; some slaves, and some free.” Where there is no strife there is decay: “the mixture which is not shaken decomposes.” In this flux of change and struggle and selection, only one thing is constant, and that is law. “This order, the same for all things, no one of gods or men has made; but it always was, and is, and shall be.” Empedocles (fl. 445 B. C., in Sicily) developed to a further stage the idea of evolution. Organs arise not by design but by selection. Nature makes many trials and experiments with organisms, combining organs variously; where the combination meets environmental needs the organism survives and perpetuates its like; where the combination fails, the organism is weeded out; as time goes on, organisms are more and more intricately and successfully adapted to their surroundings. Finally, in Leucippus (fl. 445 B. C.) and Democritus (460-360), master and pupil in Thracian Abdera, we get the last stage of pre-Aristotelian science—materialistic, deterministic atomism. “Everything,” said Leucippus, “is driven by necessity.” “In reality,” said Democritus, “there are only atoms and the void.” Perception is due to the expulsion of atoms from the object upon the sense organ There is or have been or will be an infinite number of worlds, at every moment planets are colliding and dying, and new worlds are rising out of chaos by the selective aggregation of atoms of similar size and shape. There is no design; the universe is a machine. 

Then there was speculation on the nature of the universe and its evolution.

This, in dizzy and superficial summary, is the story of Greek science before Aristotle. Its cruder items can be well forgiven when we consider the narrow circle of experimental and observational equipment within which these pioneers were compelled to work. The stagnation of Greek industry under the incubus of slavery prevented the full development of these magnificent beginnings; and the rapid complication of political life in Athens turned the Sophists and Socrates and Plato away from physical and biological research into the paths of ethical and political theory. It is one of the many glories of Aristotle that he was broad and brave enough to compass and combine these two lines of Greek thought, the physical and the moral; that going back beyond his teacher, he caught again the thread of scientific development in the pre- Socratic Greeks, carried on their work with more resolute detail and more varied observation, and brought together all the accumulated results in a magnificent body of organized science. 

Earlier scientific investigation lacked the support of experimental and observational equipment.


2. Aristotle as a Naturalist 

If we begin here chronologically, with his Physics, we shall be disappointed; for we find that this treatise is really a metaphysics, an abstruse analysis of matter, motion, space, time, infinity, cause, and other such “ultimate concepts.” One of the more lively passages is an attack on Democritus’ “void”: there can be no void or vacuum in nature, says Aristotle, for in a vacuum all bodies would fall with equal velocity; this being impossible, “the supposed void turns out to have nothing in it”—an instance at once of Aristotle’s very occasional humor, his addiction to unproved assumptions, and his tendency to disparage his predecessors in philosophy. It was the habit of our philosopher to preface his works with historical sketches of previous contributions to the subject in hand, and to add to every contribution an annihilating refutation. “Aristotle, after the Ottoman manner,” says Bacon, “thought he could not reign secure without putting all his brethren to death.” But to this fratricidal mania we owe much of our knowledge of pre-Socratic thought. 

Aristotle did not deal much with physics because of the lack of experimental and observational equipment. Before starting his own research in an area, he studied his predecessors and formed his own postulates. He then built up on those postulates.

For reasons already given, Aristotle’s astronomy represents very little advance upon his predecessors. He rejects the view of Pythagoras that the sun is the center of our system; he prefers to give that honor to the earth. But the little treatise on meteorology is full of brilliant observations, and even its speculations strike illuminating fire. This is a cyclic world, says our philosopher: the sun forever evaporates the sea, dries up rivers and springs, and transforms at last the boundless ocean into the barest rock; while conversely the uplifted moisture, gathered into clouds, falls and renews the rivers and the seas. Everywhere change goes on, imperceptibly but effectively. Egypt is “the work of the Nile,” the product of its deposits through a thousand centuries. Here the sea encroaches upon the land, there the land reaches out timidly into the sea; new continents and new oceans rise, old oceans and old continents disappear, and all the face of the world is changed and re-changed in a great systole and diastole of growth and dissolution. Sometimes these vast effects occur suddenly, and destroy the geological and material bases of civilization and even of life; great catastrophes have periodically denuded the earth and reduced man again to his first beginnings; like Sisyphus, civilization has repeatedly neared its zenith only to fall back into barbarism and begIn da capo its upward travail. Hence the almost “eternal recurrence,” in civilization after civilization, of the same inventions and discoveries, the same “dark ages” of slow economic and cultural accumulation, the same rebirths of learning and science and art. No doubt some popular myths are vague traditions surviving from earlier cultures. So the story of man runs in a dreary circle, because he is not yet master of the earth that holds him. 

Many of Aristotle’s postulates are arbitrary but he makes brilliant observations at many places, especially in the area of meteorology.


3. The Foundation of Biology 

As Aristotle walked wondering through his great zoological garden, he became convinced that the infinite variety of life could be arranged in a continuous series in which each link would be almost indistinguishable from the next. In all respects, whether in structure, or mode of life, or reproduction and rearing, or sensation and feeling, there are minute gradations and progressions from the lowest organisms to the highest. At the bottom of the scale we can scarcely divide the living from the “dead”; “nature makes so gradual a transition from the inanimate to the animate kingdom that the boundary lines which separate them are indistinct and doubtful”; and perhaps a degree of life exists even in the inorganic. Again, many species cannot with certainty be called plants or animals. And as in these lower organisms it is almost impossible at times to assign them to their proper genus and species, so similar are they; so in every order of life the continuity of gradations and differences is as remarkable as the diversity of functions and forms. But in the midst of this bewildering richness of structures certain things stand out convincingly: that life has grown steadily in complexity and in power; that intelligence has progressed in correlation with complexity of structure and mobility of form; that there has been an increasing specialization of function, and a continuous centralization of physiological control. Slowly life created for itself a nervous system and a brain; and mind moved resolutely on towards the mastery of its environment. 

One of the brilliant observations is that there are minute gradations and progressions from the lowest organisms to the highest. Life has grown steadily in complexity and in power. 

The remarkable fact here is that with all these gradations and similarities leaping to Aristotle’s eyes, he does not come to the theory of evolution. He rejects Empedocles’ doctrine that all organs and organisms are a survival of the fittest, and Anaxagoras’ idea that man became intelligent by using his hands for manipulation rather than for movement; Aristotle thinks, on the contrary, that man so used his hands because he had become intelligent. Indeed, Aristotle makes as many mistakes as possible for a man who is founding the science of biology. He thinks, for example, that the male element in reproduction merely stimulates and quickens; it does not occur to him (what we now know from experiments in parthenogenesis) that the essential function of the sperm is not so much to fertilize the ovum as to provide the embryo with the heritable qualities of the male parent, and so permit the offspring to be a vigorous variant, a new admixture of two ancestral lines. As human dissection was not practiced in his time, he is particularly fertile in physiological errors: he knows nothing of muscles, not even of their existence; he does not distinguish arteries from veins; he thinks the brain is an organ for cooling the blood; he believes, forgivably, that man has more sutures in the skull than woman; he believes, less forgivably, that man has only eight ribs on each side; he believes, incredibly, and unforgivably, that woman has fewer teeth than man. Apparently his relations with women were of the most amicable kind. 

Aristotle rejected earlier doctrines of evolution. As human dissection was not practiced in his time, he is particularly fertile in physiological errors. 

Yet he makes a greater total advance in biology than any Greek before or after him. He perceives that birds and reptiles are near allied in structure; that the monkey is in form intermediate between quadrupeds and man; and once he boldly declares that man belongs in one group of animals with the viviparous quadrupeds (our “mammals”). He remarks that the soul in infancy is scarcely distinguishable from the soul of animals. He makes the illuminating observation that diet often determines the mode of life; “for of beasts some are gregarious, and others solitary—they live in the way which is best adapted to… obtain the food of their choice.” He anticipates Von Baer’s famous law that characters common to the genus (like eyes and ears) appear in the developing organism before characters peculiar to its species (like the “formula” of the teeth), or to its individual self (like the final color of the eyes); and he reaches out across two thousand years to anticipate Spencer’s generalization that individuation varies inversely as genesis—that is that the more highly developed and specialized a species or an individual happens to be, the smaller will be the number of its offspring. He notices and explains reversion to type—the tendency of a prominent variation (like genius) to be diluted in mating and lost in successive generations. He makes many zoological observations which, temporarily rejected by later biologists, have been confirmed by modern research—of fishes that make nests, for example, and sharks that boast of a placenta. 

Yet Aristotle makes a greater total advance in biology than any Greek before or after him. 

And finally he establishes the science of embryology. “He who sees things grow from their beginning,” he writes, “will have the finest view of them.” Hippocrates (b. 460 B. C.), greatest of Greek physicians, had given a fine example of the experimental method, by breaking a hen’s eggs at various stages of incubation; and had applied the results of these studies in his treatise “On the Origin of the Child.” Aristotle followed this lead and performed experiments that enabled him to give a description of the development of the chick which even today arouses the admiration of embryologists. He must have performed some novel experiments in genetics, for he disproves the theory that the sex of the child depends on what testis supplies the reproductive fluid, by quoting a case where the right testis of the father had been tied and yet the children had been of different sexes. He raises some very modern problems of heredity. A woman of Elis had married a negro; her children were all whites, but in the next generation negroes reappeared; where, asks Aristotle, was the blackness hidden in the middle generation? There was but a step from such a vital and intelligent query to the epochal experiments of Gregor Mendel (1822-1882). Prudens quaestio dimidium scientioe—to know what to ask is already to know half. Surely, despite the errors that mar these biological works, they form the greatest monument ever raised to the science by any one man. When we consider that before Aristotle there had been, so far as we know, no biology beyond scattered observations, we perceive that this achievement alone might have sufficed for one life-time, and would have given immortality. But Aristotle had only begun. 

Aristotle made many vital and intelligent queries that later led to great discoveries. 



I believe Scientology built itself up on some kind of existing cultural brainwashing in the western society. It has not been successful in the eastern culture. I spent 12 years in the Sea Org and came out relatively okay. I have neither hate nor love for Scientology. It is just an interesting subject.

The brainwashing, which is quite prevalent in the western culture is the idea of “eternal soul”. Scientology concept of THETAN forwards that brainwashing and makes an “immortal individuality” the cornerstone of its philosophy and therapy.

There is individuality–that is not in question. But it is the belief in the adjective “immortal” attached to it that constitutes brainwashing. This belief affects so much of man’s behavior that it is amazing.

Scientology does not talk about God. There is no mention of “Lord” in its philosophy. However, it preserves that concept of God in its concept of the THETAN. THETAN combines the anthropomorphic concept of “God” with the concept of “eternal soul” into one.

In the East, the concept of ATMAN is more like the idea of an “electric current”. ATMAN is something that energizes the BODY-MIND system. PARAMATMA (supreme ATMAN) is the concept in Hinduism that is used in place of God. It refers to the most subtle form of energy and not to some “being”. The Scientology concept of THETA (life force) is similar to it.

What could be considered immortal is ENERGY WITH INNATE IMPULSE. This idea is also supported by the Law of Conservation. This energy has been expressed as ATMAN, or THETA, or Life force.

THETAN is a concept that defines the individuality of the BODY-MIND system. It is, actually, a part of the BODY-MIND system. Upon death, the BODY-MIND system disintegrates and so does the THETAN along with it. A new THETAN is formed with the next iteration of the BODY-MIND system. This is how the mechanism of evolution works.

The concept of “eternal” (along with the concepts of heaven and hell) is not necessary to enforce responsibility on the individual. The concept of “karma” is enough to make the mortal individual understand the liability that his actions can bring. He knows that the liability of his actions extends to other aspects of life, such as, the family, society, mankind, etc. It is not limited to just “that one individual in next life”.

Scientology brainwashing, which uses the the belief in “immortal individuality,” is not something new. It is something that has been considered sacred and worshipped for ages in the western culture. This fixation on individuality is what we refer to as EGO.


DIANETICS: The Four Dynamics

Reference: Hubbard 1950: Dianetics TMSMH

These are some comments on the chapter “The Four Dynamics” from DIANETICS: THE MODERN SCIENCE OF MENTAL HEALTH.


Comments on
The Four Dynamics

[NOTE: Hubbard’s earlier writing on these Dynamics appears at The Dynamics]

Man’s behavior can be explained fully only in terms of his brotherhood with the Universe. Man is the result of the evolution of the universe, and now he is acting as a catalyst to further evolution. Man’s behavior cannot be explained by focusing just on self, sex, group or even mankind. 

Hubbard asks, “Exactly for what is man surviving?” He then comes up with four dynamics (DYNAMIC = “innate impulse or urge”). 

“DYNAMIC ONE is the urge toward ultimate survival on the part of the individual and for himself. It includes his immediate symbiotes, the extension of culture for his own benefit, and name immortality. (SYMBIOTE = “any or all life or energy forms which are mutually dependent for survival.”)

“DYNAMIC TWO is the urge of the individual toward ultimate survival via the sex act, the creation of and the rearing of children. It includes their symbiotes, the extension of culture for them, and their future provision. 

“DYNAMIC THREE is the urge of the individual toward ultimate survival for the group. It includes the symbiotes of the group and the extension of its culture. 

“DYNAMIC FOUR includes the urge of the individual toward ultimate survival for all Mankind. It includes the symbiotes of Mankind and the extension of its culture.”

As explained in the previous chapter, this “ultimate survival” is not immortality but attainment of a STATIC viewpoint from which further evolution of the universe may be catalyzed.

Attainment of STATIC viewpoint requires Man to expand his viewpoint from self to families, to groups, to species, and to all mutually dependent entities.

As a person grows up, his viewpoint naturally expands from dynamic one to dynamic two, three and four. A higher dynamic is naturally inclusive of the lower dynamics. Any exception would only mean fixation on a dynamic to the exclusion of other dynamics. A fixation would simply amount to the aberration defined as a “narrow viewpoint.” A rational person shall be operating harmoniously on all dynamics.

Any competition among dynamics, if not harmonious, would constitute an anomaly that needs to be resolved. An anomaly, if considered to be something normal, shall be an aberration.

Any solution must resolve the anomaly (disharmony, discontinuity or inconsistency) completely, and that would bring about an optimum scene. The categorization into four dynamics is for the sake of dealing with the complexity of a situation only. 

Hubbard says, “The case of a sailor giving his own life to save his ship answers the group dynamic. Such an action is a valid solution to a problem. But it violates the optimum solution because it did not answer for Dynamic One: self.”

Of course, it would be optimum to save oneself while also saving the group, but the safety of the group comes first, and the group must be saved even at the expense of self, depending on its value to mankind.



I am presenting here the axioms of Dianetics, and how they appear when made consistent with Buddhism.

DN AXIOM 31: Wrongness is always miscalculation of effort.

DN AXIOM 31 (proposed): Wrongness is always miscalculation or misalignment of effort.


DN AXIOM 32: THETA can exert itself directly or extensionally.
THETA can direct physical application of the organism to the environment or, through the mind, can first calculate the action or extend, as in language, ideas.

DN AXIOM 32 (proposed): The life organism can exert itself on the environment directly, or by extending ideas.


DN AXIOM 33: Conclusions are directed toward the inhibition, maintenance or accelerations of efforts.

DN AXIOM 33 (proposed): The organism may direct conclusions to inhibit, maintain or accelerate its efforts.


DN AXIOM 34: The common denominator of all life organisms is motion.

DN AXIOM 34 (proposed): The common denominator of all life organisms is alignment of motion.


DN AXIOM 35: Effort of an organism to survive or succumb is physical motion of a life organism at a given moment in time through space.
DEFINITION: Motion is any change in orientation in space.
DEFINITION: Force is random effort.
DEFINITION: Effort is directed force.

DN AXIOM 35 (proposed): Effort to evolve is the alignment of motion of a life organism at any given moment.
DEFINITION (proposed): Alignment of motion is the establishment of harmony, continuity and consistency.
DEFINITION (proposed): Force is the effort to overcome the resistance to alignment.
DEFINITION (proposed): Effort is directed alignment.


DN AXIOM 36: An organism’s effort can be to remain at rest or persist in a given motion.
Static state has position in time, but an organism which is remaining positionally in a static state, if alive, is still continuing a highly complex pattern of motion, such as the heartbeat, digestion, etc. The efforts of organisms to survive or succumb are assisted, compelled or opposed by the efforts of other organisms, matter, energy, space and time.
DEFINITION: Attention is a motion which must remain at an optimum effort. Attention is aberrated by becoming unfixed and sweeping at random or becoming too fixed without sweeping. Unknown threats to survival when sensed cause attention to sweep without fixing. Known threats to survival when sensed cause attention to fix.

DN AXIOM 36 (proposed): An organism’s efforts can be either free or fixed, and they are assisted or opposed by the efforts of other organisms and environment.
DEFINITION (proposed): Attention is a motion which must remain free. Attention is aberrated by becoming fixed. Known or unknown threats, when sensed, cause attention to fix.


DN AXIOM 37: The ultimate goal of LAMBDA is infinite survival.

DN AXIOM 37 (proposed): The ultimate goal of living organisms is continued evolution.


DN AXIOM 38: Death is abandonment by THETA of a life organism or race or species where these can no longer serve THETA in its goals of infinite survival.

DN AXIOM 38 (proposed): Death is the disintegration of a life organism into its elements, which then recombine into a more evolved form.


DN AXIOM 39: The reward of an organism engaging upon survival activity is pleasure.

DN AXIOM 39 (proposed): An organism engaging in further alignment of motion feels joy.


DN AXIOM 40: The penalty of an organism failing to engage upon survival activity, or engaging in non-survival activity, is pain.

DN AXIOM 40 (proposed): An organism failing to engage in alignment of motion, or engaging in misalignment, feels pain.


Summary of Axioms

A life organism evolves through the alignment of motion. Pleasure is an indicator of alignment. Pain is an indicator of misalignment or lack of alignment.


DIANETICS: The Goal of Man

Reference: Hubbard 1950: Dianetics TMSMH

These are some comments on the chapter “The Goal of Man” from  DIANETICS: THE MODERN SCIENCE OF MENTAL HEALTH.


Comments on
The Goal of Man

Hubbard writes:
“TIME, SPACE, ENERGY and LIFE have a single denominator in common. As an analogy it could be considered that TIME, SPACE, ENERGY and LIFE began at some point of origin and were commanded to continue to some nearly infinite destination. They were told nothing but WHAT to do. They obey a single order and that order is “SURVIVE!”

Did the universe begin at some point? Was it commanded to SURVIVE? The ancient Vedas say that the universe has neither a beginning nor an end. Science says that energy forms the basic substance of the universe and it is conserved. Thus, from all evidence, energy has always been there, and it has no choice but to survive.

Hubbard writes:
“THE DYNAMIC PRINCIPLE OF EXISTENCE IS SURVIVAL The goal of life can be considered to be infinite survival. Man, as a life form, can be demonstrated to obey in all his actions and purposes the one command: SURVIVE!”

Although energy has no choice but to survive, the energy forms appear and disappear, and through this process, the forms change and evolve. Subtle energy evolves into solid atoms of matter (see the ELECTROMAGNETIC SPECTRUM). Atoms evolve into complex atoms (see the PERIODIC TABLE). Atoms combine into molecules and these molecules also evolve into complex molecules (see CHEMISTRY). Complex molecules acquire enough electronic circuits to develop self-animation. Thus come about basic life forms that evolve into complex life forms (see BIOLOGY). Life forms develop the ability to react. Such reactions gradually evolve into sophisticated analytical abilities. Thus life forms evolve from minerals to plants to animals to humans. Since Man is part of the universe, his goal is consistent with the overall goal of the universe, which is evidently, to EVOLVE. 

Like the energy it is made of, Mankind cannot help but survive. Although individual human forms take birth and ultimately die, they evolve from the experience of living. The goal of Man, therefore, is continual evolution, and not the immortality of some individual form.

Some may assume that the goal of Man is to be immortal. But the actual goal of Man, like the goal of the universe and life, has always been to EVOLVE.

Where evolution will ultimates take us, we don’t know; and that is the energizing aspect of it. This is the aspect of an advancing science compared to a moribund religion.

Hubbard writes:
“In order to establish nomenclature in dianetics which would not be too complex for the purpose, words normally considered as adjectives or verbs have occasionally been pressed into service as nouns.”

Some of the words coined by Hubbard as nouns are as follows.

DYNAMIC    = innate impulse or urge
SOMATIC     = physical sensation
PERCEPTIC = a sense message

Hubbard writes:
“… a spectrum of life has been conceived to span from the zero of death or extinction toward the infinity of potential immortality… The thrust of survival is away from death and toward immortality. The ultimate pain could be conceived as existing just before death and the ultimate pleasure could be conceived as immortality… The urge is away from death, which has a repelling force, and toward immortality, which has an attracting force; the attracting force is pleasure, the repelling force is pain… Pain is provided to repel the individual from death, pleasure is provided to call him toward optimum life.”

Hubbard postulates “thetan” as the ultimate in individuality and gives it the attribute of immortality. Thus “thetan” is similar to the concept of “eternal soul” in Christianity. However, individuality belongs to the body-mind system as its core property. The body-mind system is subject to the cycle of birth and death, and so is individuality. What is eternal is the life force (symbolized by Hubbard as THETA), which energizes the body-mind-individuality system. Like the idea of the “eternal soul,” the postulate of an “immortal thetan” is also in error. Neither soul nor thetan stands apart from the body-mind system. What stands apart is the STATIC viewpoint.

By definition, the STATIC viewpoint stands beyond all MOTION. Motion is the key characteristic of the universe. Motion becomes “emotion” in life organisms. Therefore, the STATIC viewpoint stands beyond all emotion also. An individual, when cleared of all anomalies, attains the STATIC viewpoint. He then views all motion (the universe) and emotion (life experiences) objectively without alteration.

It may be said that attaining the STATIC viewpoint is the goal of Man. But this STATIC viewpoint simply helps man to evolve through the cycles of birth and death.

Hubbard talks about a spectrum from death to immortality. It may be viewed as a spectrum from total subjectivity to complete objectivity. Near death, the viewpoint is totally subjective and expressed as apathy. Immortality lies in the total objectivity of the STATIC viewpoint expressed as happiness in action. The thrust from this viewpoint is always toward evolution. Each step of evolution brings immense joy. The death of the body-mind system is inevitable. There may be pain associated with death; but a person with STATIC viewpoint views death simply as a phenomena to be experienced.

Hubbard seems to advance the idea that all actions of life are driven by pain and pleasure. This is not so. All actions of life are driven by the dynamic of the life organism. Pain and pleasure are just indicators that help one evaluate the experience at that moment. The state of mind may be graded on a tone scale—apathy, anger, bearable existence, happiness. This mental state may reflect how subjective or objective the viewpoint is. The freer is the viewpoint from fixations the more objective it is. 

Dianetics assumes that aberration enters through pain only. But aberration also enters through the fixation and narrowing of the viewpoint as one goes through various experiences in life. The narrower is the viewpoint the more selfish and immoral the person becomes.

A broad STATIC viewpoint is all inclusive. Life is a group effort. As the forms grow more complex, a tremendous interdependence exists. None survive alone.



I am presenting here the axioms of Dianetics, and how they appear when made consistent with Buddhism.

DN AXIOM 21: LAMBDA is dependent upon optimum motion. Motion which is too swift and motion which is too slow are equally contra survival.

Life organism must maintain a harmonious rate of progression in following the laws of nature. Sudden shift in motion, such as, the experience of shocks, can hurt the progression of life organisms.

DN AXIOM 21 (proposed): Sudden shift in motion, as in shocks, generates disharmony, and is destructive to life organisms.


DN AXIOM 22: THETA and thought are similar orders of static.

THETA is the static viewpoint. As THETA views chaos thought is generated. By resolving itself, thought converts chaos into order. Energy thus evolves. 

DN AXIOM 22 (proposed): Thought originates and dissolves to bring about the change needed for evolution.


DN AXIOM 23: All thought is concerned with motion.

Thought results from chaotic motion. The chaotic motion presents an anomaly (disharmony, discontinuity or inconsistency). It is in the nature of thought to dissolve itself by resolving that anomaly.

DN AXIOM 23 (proposed): All thought is concerned with dissolving itself by resolving anomalies.


DN AXIOM 24: The establishment of an optimum motion is a basic goal of reason.

DEFINITION: LAMBDA is a chemical heat engine existing in space and time motivated by the life static and directed by thought.

The native impulse of the life organism is to evolve by bringing lasting order in its environment. Thus the thought generated in the organism establishes harmony, continuity and consistency in the environment to resolve that disorder. This is reason in action.

DN AXIOM 24 (proposed): The basic goal of reason is to establish harmony, continuity and consistency.


DN AXIOM 25: The basic purpose of reason is the calculation or estimation of effort.

The thought must estimate the effort necessary to establish harmony, continuity and consistency. This is what the thought engages in all the time.

DN AXIOM 25 (proposed): The basic purpose of reason is the calculation or estimation of the effort.


DN AXIOM 26: Thought is accomplished by THETA FACSIMILES of physical universe, entities or actions.

Life organisms maintain a mental matrix in which all perceptions from the environment (THETA FACSIMILES) are assimilated. The matrix consists of multi-dimensional associations. Thoughts are generated when perceptions cannot be assimilated due to anomalies (disharmonies, discontinuities and inconsistencies). The goal of these thoughts is accomplished when the anomalies are resolved.

DN AXIOM 26 (proposed): Thought is accomplished with the resolution of anomalies in the perceptions from the environment.


DN AXIOM 27: THETA is satisfied only with harmonious action or optimum motion and rejects or destroys action or motion above or below its tolerance band.

Evolution in this universe requires eliminating all sudden shifts in motion (shocks) and establishing harmonious action or optimum motion. 

DN AXIOM 27 (proposed): Evolutionary progress requires the elimination of shocks and the establishment of optimum motion.


DN AXIOM 28: The mind is concerned wholly with the estimation of effort.

DEFINITION: Mind is the THETA command post of any organism or organisms.

The reason is applied through the mind of the life organism. Therefore, mind may be regarded as the command post of the life organism which is concerned wholly with the estimation of effort.

DN AXIOM 28 (proposed): The mind is the command post of the organism, which is concerned wholly with the estimation of effort.


DN AXIOM 29: The basic errors of reason are failure to differentiate amongst matter, energy, space and time.

The reason estimates the effort required to resolve anomalies. The basic errors of reason would be a failure to recognize disharmonies, discontinuities and inconsistencies that generate anomalies in perceptions.

DN AXIOM 29 (proposed): The basic errors of reason are failure to recognize discontinuities, disharmonies and inconsistencies in perceptions.


DN AXIOM 30: Rightness is proper calculation of effort.

That which resolves anomalies by correctly recognizing the discontinuities, disharmonies and inconsistencies, is the right effort. Estimation of such an effort constitutes rightness.

DN AXIOM 30 (proposed): Rightness is the calculation of effort required to resolve an anomaly.


Summary of Axioms

To evolve, anomalies must be resolved. An anomaly occurs when there is sudden shift in motion generating disharmony, discontinuity, or inconsistency. This creates thought that must be dissolved by resolving the anomaly. Reason estimates the effort required to resolve the anomaly and restore harmony, continuity and consistency to motion. This effort is carried out in the mind. Rightness depends on the correct estimation of the effort required to resolve the anomaly.