• Google translate:  
Increase Font Sizesmallerreset
Home arrow Psychotherapy Cults arrow Scientology (Dianetics) arrow Association between Dianetics and Scientology (Anderson Report)

Association between Dianetics and Scientology (Anderson Report)


Report of the Board of Enquiry into Scientology

by Kevin Victor Anderson, Q.C.

Published 1965 by the State of Victoria, Australia



Hubbard founded the Hubbard Dianetic Research Foundation in California in 1950. By 1951, his experiments in dianetic processing had reached the stage where he wished to develop the past lives theory beyond merely the prenatal period. He found in dianetic processing that preclears came up with incidents which could not have happened either in this lifetime or in the prenatal period. He accepted the incidents as real, though it appeared that they had occurred prior to the prenatal period, sometimes very man y years earlier. In 1951, because of differences between himself and the board of control of the Hubbard Dianetic Research Foundation, he withdrew from that organization and continued alone his probing of the past. In this way, he founded scientology, which involved his "discovery", by what he claimed to be scientific methods, of the thetan or the soul or the spirit, which he claimed had existed for all time and had possessed countless bodies, over millions of years. There now opened before him the entran cing and limitless vista of the past with boundless scope for his imagination.

The Hubbard Dianetic Research Foundation seems to have fallen on hard times by about 1954, and Hubbard acquired it in some way which did not clearly emerge in the evidence. By 1955, dianetics was Hubbard's once more, and he held a congress to celebrate the reunion which he called the Unification Congress.

Scientology witnesses repeatedly asserted during the Inquiry that dianetics was not now practised. Their anxiety to establish this contention was understandable, because of the forthright claims made by dianetics to cure with certainty a great number of man's ills. Hubbard has not retracted any of the claims which he had earlier made for dianetics, and the scientology witnesses did not resile in any way from the claims which had been made as to the efficacy of dianetics to cure with certainty 70 per cent. of man's psychosomatic illnesses and aberrations. They said, however, that at the present time scientologists were not interested in curing ills but only in making the able more able. Tampion said that, though the highly efficacious skills of dianetics were available to cure the mentally ill, it was uneconomic to do so, as far quicker results were obtained "making the able more able" than by making the less able, able.

The scientology witnesses pointed out what they claimed were important distinctions between dianetics and scientology. For instance, Hubbard in HCO Bull. of 1st July, AD 13 (1963), wrote:

"With the advent of Scientology with its complete shift from Dianetic goals, healing went out as a reason for running engrams and concern about the body vanished as an auditing target .... Engram running has vanished as a healing process. Engram handling by chains has emerged as an entirely reoriented subject, not even vaguely connected with the body and with the target not of a human clear but of Operating Thetan."
It was said that since the discovery that the thetan had engrams the theory that the engram recording was cellular did not exist in scientology (notwithstanding the positive assertion in dianetics as a proven fact that the engram recording was cellular), because the recording was now of the engram of the thetan which had no cells on which the recording could be impinged.

Williams explained what he described as the "principal changeover" from dianetics to scientology thus: "The early dianetic work said that what aberrated the individual was what was done to the individual, whereas in scientology we see introduced the concept that it is what the individual himself has done that can aberrate him," that is, the individual takes responsibility for his own condition. Williams further expressed the distinction between dianetics and scientology thus: "At the end of a dianetics session he (the preclear) would say, 'I have recovered from something someone did to me.' At the end of the scientology session he would say, 'I have recovered from something as a result of what I have done.' So, it is contradictory".

One important aspect of scientology auditing is that a person should be "at cause," just as a clear is said to be at cause, and that a person should be responsible and should accept responsibility. The preclear is persuaded in auditing that, by probing the past and uncovering all aspects of whatever may be the situation being audited, he will understand how and why the situation came about. He is said then to have a clearer understanding of things and to accept responsibility, for auditing tends to explai n whatever may have happened - or the preclear believes happened - as due to himself and to decisions made or acts done or thoughts entertained by himself. Nobody is sick, asserts Hubbard, unless he wants to be sick; even a soldier wounded by enemy action is said to be responsible for his wound because of his own non-survival thought or action. Anything which has happened to a person, so it is said, is because of some non-survival act which he himself is responsible for. The preclear thus examines his pas t in an accusative way, accepting responsibility and acknowledging guilt for happenings in respect of which he was in no way culpable. The quality of guilt is thereby given to the most innocent action, and the acceptance of responsibility in this distorted way, far from benefiting the preclear, leaves him prey to great anxieties and predisposed to undertake more auditing to find relief from the very anxieties that auditing produces.

Williams, in pointing out a distinction as to responsibility according to whether the preclear has been dianetically or scientologically processed, merely illustrates an immaterial distinction, for the techniques are essentially the same, and if scientology preclears soliloquize differently from dianetic preclears it is merely because they have been so indoctrinated.

Though there do exist these and other distinctions between dianetics and scientology, though the techniques which have developed in recent years are called by scientological names and are said to be directed towards the thetan or spirit rather than the body, there has continued to be a close and unbroken association between the two As already mentioned, dianetics is repeatedly referred to in scientological writings as a sub-subject of scientology - as that part of scientology which deals with mental anato my - and scientology witnesses agreed that dianetics was still a part of scientology. Even during the Inquiry the two names appeared boldly across the front of the HASI premises at 157-9 Spring Street, Melbourne.

In HCO Pol. Lr. of the 26th February, 1961, Hubbard refers to the "International Council of Dianetics and Scientology", which is legalized by the legal structure of HCO. Ltd. and by my will of December 26, 1960 "to which Council Williams and Mrs. Williams were appointed, the purpose of the Council being stated to be, "to ensure the smooth running of Dianetics and Scientology throughout the world, to safeguard and increase their money and properties and to provide good administration, excellent service and justice".

Numerous bulletins contain references to dianetics which indicate that it is still very much alive.

Hubbard has been most insistent in numerous bulletins that the sales of his book, Dianetics: MSMH should be pushed virtually to the exclusion of other literature. In HCO Bull. of the 28th April, 1960, Hubbard writes,

"Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health contains today a perfectly workable therapy. But more importantly it contains a bridge between the uninformed and the informed public on the subject of scientology".

In the same bulletin, Hubbard writes,

"When people are asking you questions about Dianetics and Scientology, no matter how obtuse or abstruse the questions are, your best answer to these questions was my earliest answer and that was, Read Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health and that will answer your question . . We have made a break-through. The moment of the break-through is recorded at public level with Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health. If people do not read this book, they just will not have broken through .... To all Central Orgs. Push this book with every possible display and mention .... Play down all other PE books, display Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health as the book they must now buy .... We've lost the people in a maze of many titles. Take down all your modern book displays. Concentrate on one, Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health".
This direction makes it clear that dianetics is a current study and very much alive. Obediently to Hubbard's command the Melbourne HASI gave precedence to Dianetics: MSMH and prominently displayed the book in its window.

In HCO Bull. of the 6th October, 1960, Hubbard directs that professional auditors be written to telling them that there are unlimited supplies of Dianetics: MSMH available and that

"As we feel that this book is the best possible dissemination for Scientology, we want to get it out to people with the least possible delay". As an inducement to the auditors, the instruction continued, "For each and every copy of Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health that you buy from us for cash you will get a credit of £1 in the HGC. This offer is only open to professional auditors - the public will buy the book from you in the usual way".

The Melbourne HASI monthly magazine Communication of which Mrs. Williams was at least until October, 1964, the editor, bore at that date the legend "The Official Periodical of Dianetics and Scientology in Australia".

The Com. Mag. of May, 1960, states in relation to Dianetics: MSMH that to say it was "invaluable both to the Student of Scientology and to anyone wishing to find his way in the labyrinth of human behaviour, is an understatement: the book is, in fact, essential reading". The Com. Mag. of June, 1961, reprints part of the first chapter of Dianetics: MSMH.

The Com. Mag. of November, 1962, refers to Dianetics: MSMH thus: "This book describes the states of a 'release' and 'clear' obtainable through Scientology processing". The Com. Mag. of February - March, 1963, describes Dianetics: MSMH as "the basic text book on the mind and clearing"

The Com. Mag. of May, 1965, is mainly an advertisement for The Original Thesis written by Hubbard in 1948, which is described as "The Original Text on Dianetics" and is said to be "an excellent beginning text for anyone starting in Scientology".

Many ideas developed in dianetics were adopted into scientology, e.g., the engram, the time track, the clear, the release. It may well be that emphasis and direction have changed, but dianetics has always remained and is still an integral part of scientology. Witnesses were constrained to admit that it was important to scientology. Williams conceded that "it has key importance", but the explanation of the HASI for the continued association of Dianetics: MSMH with scientology was that it provided he lpful background material and enabled the history of scientology to be appreciated and understood, so that the inquirer "can read through Dianetics and can understand the rest of it".

The connexion between dianetics and scientology and the continued prominence given to Dianetics: MSMH were of much more significance and importance in this Inquiry than historical or background material. As will appear later in this Report, for a considerable number of years, scientology, in a guarded and veiled manner yet nonetheless deliberately and consistently, has been purporting to treat illnesses and effect cures.

Protestations that scientology does not claim to cure are idle, because at the same time the HASI offers to inquirers its dianetic literature which proclaims the efficacy at wholesale healing of one of the branches of scientology. In the Melbourne HASI Com. Mag. Vol. 1, No. 10, there appears in bold type the announcement that "All you have read about in scientology and dianetics can be achieved by you with processing from the Hubbard Guidance Centre". The two subjects are deliberately woven togethe r in this confusing way in order to deceive the uncritical who are led to believe that scientology has healing techniques, and at the same time to enable the HASI, when challenged by government authority, to reply that is does not claim to heal. The scientological attitude is, in effect, "Scientology does not claim to cure, but in the past it has done the wonderful things set out in Dianetics: MSMH and other books. Of course it does not claim to cure but ...." The success of this technique is measured by the number of mentally and physically ill people who have patronised the Melbourne HASI. Such number does not admit a precise definition, but it is evident from an examination of numerous files that the technique adopted by the HASI of disclaiming to heal but pointing to past achievements was effective in many cases.


Last updated 20-3-96 by Chris Owen

This page has not been endorsed, produced or commissioned by the Church of Scientology and does not represent the opinions of the Church.

All quotations from copyrighted works are made under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988.