We can relax and just coast here. There's not very much going to happen between now and the end of the congress.

Not very much.

I have the pleasure at the moment of announcing to you pursuant to my last lecture concerning responsibility, a new organization.

We have undoubtedly founded here the first American school of mental practice and understanding. And if we do less than take full responsibility for mental practice in the United States we would be very foolish.

The last time I looked it was still our country. Maybe the next time I look that will not be true — that will not be true. But nevertheless it still is.

And therefore I don't see any reason why an American school should be lambasted and slam-banged and fooled with, reviled in its own country unless it is true that America kills all those who try to help her. If that's true then there is no hope for it.

Just why we have had a bad seven years is because the field of mental practice itself is bad beyond bad. Extremely bad. I'm not telling you now that it's all bad over there. I am simply telling you that the world of psychology, psychiatry and psychoanalysis has erred sweepingly! And that all mental practice today should be in worse repute than it is.

Two thousand dead men per year, two thousand dead men per year — under electric shock. Thousands more dead with brain surgery. People whose lives are being wrecked, men whose lives are being ended by suicide, all because of thoroughly bad mental practice in the United States. The United States up to this time has imported nearly all of its mental practice from Russia, and from Germany.

Now, a lot of you people don't believe me when I tell you that psychology in the United States was founded by Professor Wundt of Leipzig, Germany in 1879. Of course, Columbia University teaches psychology, doesn't it? And it's an American school, isn't it? They teach the work of Professor Wundt, Leipzig, Germany, 1879, a pal of Karl Marx.

Listen, it isn't "psychology." The word "psyche" means spirit, and "ology" or "logos" means study or knowledge.

What does the anatomy of the brain have to do with "psyche"? Nothing! We practice in the field of "psychophysics." It's a word you will find in the dictionary. It is the inter-influence between mind and matter, or spirit and matter more properly. "Psychophysics" the interrelationship between spirit and matter.

Now psychology is understood to be something between the brain and the body today, and that is a complete misnomer, and the moment we swing this thing back what do we find lying before us? We find a vista of abuse, of lies, of a country's morale being caved-in, of the most villainous activities man ever invented being garbed with the respectability of degrees and universities and so on.

We have this constant statement held up to us that IQ cannot be changed. That is taught in the universities of America! That personality cannot in any way be altered. Now, wait a minute, wait a minute, if that is true, why are they operating? Look, if man can't be changed what are they doing?

Should there be any respectability at all to this then? They must be studying in a total defeatism, but what are they studying and why are they studying it if there is nothing can be done about it? And yet nobody seems to have asked that sensible question.

So today we have asked it with the formation and foundation of the National Academy of American Psychology, lately formed in Washington, DC, chartered by the District of Columbia and officered by people who know what they are doing.

Now, why should we go ahead and do this? It is not that Scientology becomes psychology, but that the field and practice of psychology, the field and practice of psychiatry, the field and practice of psychoanalysis have thrown into disrepute mental practice in the United States to such a degree that we have a difficult time going forward.

If you were in an automobile and you find a tree blown down across the road, let me assure you the sensible thing to do is to remove the tree. And we, as we go down the road, discover that a tree lies across our track and that tree is all the mistakes that have been made, all of the people who've been disillusioned, all of the students who have been brought into universities and taught psychology, which mainly was name the parts of the brain. The parts of the brain? What does this have to do with psychology?

Now, it's a materialistic study a hundred percent and I am not going to give you a lecture on the length and breadth of psychology. I ask you to get a standard text on the line and read it for a change! Read it. And if you find anything in it that will help you help your fellow man, I will pay you a thousand dollars cash! It says apathy-apathy-apathy- apathy-apathy.

Psychology cannot be defined because it is — used to be that "psyche" meant spirit; it doesn't mean spirit today — and it used to mean mind, but it doesn't mean mind today, and it doesn't study because it — didn't but it's all — … You have to know its history in order to know what it means. W L. Mann, a paraphrase of his opening paragraphs.

What a fascinating — what a fascinating series of buffooneries. And we're expected to kowtow to and obey the laws laid down by these fakers! And I won't do it anymore! Scare ya?

It is time that America cleaned up its psychology, psychiatry and psycho-analysis; it's time it cleaned it up, so therefore I have taken the occasion of its filthiness to write a loyalty oath which they better sign or else.

The NAAP is totally devoted to just this, a clean-up. It isn't going to train anybody; it isn't going to do anything for anybody, beyond try to assure the public of good practice in the field of mental practice; that is all it is going to do, like the Good Housekeeping Institute. Do you get the idea?

Now if you think that it has anything else in mind, why just banish it because it doesn't. Has nothing else in mind but the cleanup of psychiatry, psychology and psychoanalysis. And that is all it's got in mind.

Its existence does not make you a psychologist. Membership in it does not make you a psychologist — you are still a Scientologist even if you are a member of it. Do you understand? Anybody can be a member of it and it doesn't cost a dime. It costs nothing to be a member of it at all.

All right, I wrote up here a loyalty oath of mental practice. Now, why did I say a "loyalty oath of mental practice?" That's because Euro-Russian psychology is the only psychology taught in the United States today in these great institutions that are turning out all these scientists that are not firing off Vanguards properly.

Now, if these are foreign philosophies, they possibly could be used to no good. Remember these are the philosophies that gave Germany into the hands of Hitler, that gave Russia into the hands of Stalin. These same philosophies spread about gave Italy into the hands of Mussolini; these are the philosophies that started totalitarian states, and are directly responsible for the death of 30 million people in the last two decades! Don't think that they don't have a lot of arsenic slid in along with them. You couldn't overstate the case against them.

But there is no reason why they cannot practice ethically if they must practice at all.

And when we read in See magazine, and Changing Times and old issues of Coronets about these "quack Scientologists." If you think I am going to take this laying down and without manning a few machine guns, you have overlooked the fact that I am used to manning machine guns. Now, if I say that we should clean up mental practice in the United States, it is only pursuant to taking some responsibility for our own field. And as long as we sit back and say, "Well, we are just ourselves, us poor little organization with everybody against us" we will never get anywhere. It is time that we took responsibility across the field of mental practice, and this we intend to do.

Therefore, I have written this Loyalty Oath of Mental Practice and if the boys can't sign this, they shouldn't be tampering with human thinkingness.

It goes this way:

"I hereby subscribe to the following code of ethics and practice and swear to abide by it at all times."

The hooker in that line is an interesting one. He "swears to abide by it at all times." Failing to abide by it brings him up for a charge of perjury which is a criminal offense. So this oath has teeth in it.

"One: To support the Constitution of the government of the United States."

Actually, that's perfectly all right. But it is an odd thing that all loyalty oaths to date have said "to support the constitution" but not "to support the government." Did you know that? They all say "support the constitution." But a psychologist ought to support the Constitution of the government of the United States. Now, these two words combined are quite interesting. Supposing the government of the United States departed from the Constitution? Then it's not the government of the United States. Okay.

"Two: To refuse to practice brainwashing upon American citizens."

I can just see some Congressman picking this loyalty oath up, you see and going "Dirk!" It never occurred to him that he has several thousand people in the country who are dedicated to brainwashing, trained in it carefully.

"Three: To actively prevent the teaching of only foreign psychology in public schools and universities."

Well, it's true, that's all that is taught. There are a lot of psychologies; we're not being a specialist in this line. We don't say they ought to teach Dianetics and Scientology. As a matter of fact, we probably wouldn't let them muck it up. But by golly, there's a lot of good psychologies back along the line. There's the psychology of William James, there is the educational psychology of Dewey. What's the matter with these things? Why don't they study them? Why do they have to bow down to this character Pavlov?

Pavlov was probably very good for dogs. But Americans weren't the last time I looked. Furthermore, the jerk wasn't even right. I shouldn't disgrace Mr. Pavlov with that. But he is another amoral scientist. Stalin said, "Pavlov, come down here to the Kremlin, we have a little room for you. Now, you sit down there and write everything you know about dogs that you think would apply to human beings." So he did. He wrote this big manuscript about 400 pages. And they kept it in the Kremlin and about two or three years later, remember all the confessions that came forth? Well, that was Pavlov's work. And anybody that says that this boy didn't have a political pitch is goofy.

Oh, yeah, maybe he just felt overwhelmed by it all. Well, let me clue you, I haven't felt overwhelmed by it all. I just didn't wear out my elbow saluting at all when the ONR told me to come down there and research to make people more suggestible. And they said if I didn't do it, why they'd call me back to active duty.

And they told me that on Monday and by Thursday I had effected a resignation from the United States Navy. And when they came back on Thursday and said, "Well, you are in for it now!" I said, "Brother, mitt me, I'm a civilian."

Just because you know something, you don't have to be a rat!

Now, therefore we get to this one:

"To use my knowledge and skill only to the benefit of US individuals and groups."

I can just see some of these boys down in ONR when this thing is shoved under their nose and they are told to sign and they are working totally upon how to make people more suggestible and cave them in. They won't be able to sign it. Too bad.

"Five: To engage in no conspiracy to commit or treat persons for purely self-interested or political reasons."

"Six: To refuse to protect criminals by supporting questionable pleas of insanity at trials."

"Seven: To discourage all violence against the mentally ill."

"Eight: To refuse to use, advocate or experiment with methods of quote-therapy-unquote, upon patients which might bring about incapacitating physical injury to the patient's brain tissue or body."

"Nine: (And here we shoot straight at organizations raised up to support only foreign psychology.) To refuse to contribute money, dues or my services to organizations which knowingly impede American scientific research programs, or which work to discredit American psychologists to the public." And over that will float a little marker marked "APA." Because they do contribute money to impede American scientific research if they contributed a dime to getting us slambasted anywhere at any time.

"Ten: To refute propaganda to the effects that the study of psychology is hopeless, that IQ cannot be improved and that personality cannot be changed."

"Eleven: To refuse to accept for counseling or psychological assistance, and to refuse to accept money from any patient or group I feel I cannot honestly help and to offer no solution or cure I cannot accomplish."

"Twelve: To refuse to advertise beyond the display of my professional card."

"Thirteen: To render good treatment, sound training and good discipline to those students or people entrusted to my care."

"Fourteen: To engage in no unseemly disputes with the uninformed on the subject of my profession."

"Fifteen: To refuse to interfere with the lives of my patients beyond actual treatment."

And this to a Scientologist here has got a real curve in it. This, sixteen — all of the psychologists and psychiatrists maintain that they support two or three of these clauses, but they don't, nobody has ever made them sign on the dotted line to do so. This one is one of them: "To refer to competent medical treatment ills which demand medical attention."

We're not sure that any do. Liberal interpretation — that's open to.

"Seventeen: (And just to agree with them) to hold in confidence the secrets of my patients."

And, eighteen is the deadly one: "To accept as fellow psychologists only psychologists adhering to this code and to speak no word of criticism in public of them."

Well, that's more than a piece of paper. This organization, the National Academy of American Psychology has this program: To place under the noses of every person in mental practice in the United States whether graduated from universities or anything else, a copy of this code and ask them to sign on the dotted line, whether it is done by mail or in person, and to carefully note down all those who refuse to sign it. Very important that last step.

Since a police officer, or a legislator would be unable to conceive of why they couldn't sign it. And to this degree the only credit I take unto myself in the writing of this code is I consider it as a masterpiece just to this degree, that a fellow who means ill wouldn't dare sign it, but a police officer hearing that he couldn't and reading it, would not be able to figure out why. Do you get it? In other words, this blows into view the fact that there are tremendous numbers of people in mental practice who would not adhere to this code even vaguely, many parts of it.

But when they rush into legislators and say, "We've got to legislate out of existence all these psycho-quacks!" And when they rush into the police and say, "We got to arrest all those bad people over there because they're unethical." They are talking from a point we used to call a hidden standard.

Your mother used to say to you, "You could be a much better girl." Your father used to say to you, "You should be a better boy." Your teacher used to say to you, "Why aren't you a better student?"

Well, look, what was "a better student?" What was "a good girl?" What was a "good boy?" If you ask any kid to define these things, they will think it over for a while and finally come up with a startling answer, "that a good boy never moves and is dead."

These people have been rushing around passing legislative bills and beating the drum and getting articles in magazines from a hidden standard; they act as though they had a standard! They act as though they are decent people and that all other people are bad and therefore should be punished, so we are turning around and saying, "Look, prove that you are decent people before you talk." And that's what that's for.

Now, if we are industrious about this, we can do totally a clerical job. This is only a clerical job; it is no more important than that. Those people who contribute their time to it will simply contribute their time clerically, that's all; I mean it's just a — it's just a routine action. This thing is really grooved.

This folder you have here requires no letter of explanation beyond the letter of explanation inside its first page. It merely says what the NAAP is; it says what its purpose is and it asks the fellow to, on this side, sign this loyalty oath of mental practice, and on this side asks him to fill this in for application for membership. Membership doesn't cost him anything.

The only thing a membership says in it is that he's supposed to follow that loyalty oath, that's all, it's the only thing required of him.

The organization does sell this factor; it does sell this service that it will validate qualifications. The NAAP will actually issue a certificate saying to wit, "That the National Academy of American Psychology, chartered in the District of Columbia has subscribed that so-and-so has subscribed to the policies of the NAAP and has sworn to the loyalty oath of mental practice, and that a thorough investigation, examination of his qualifications demonstrates him to be skilled in, in this particular case Scientology, which has nothing to do with psychology." In other words it validates his qualifications.

Now, why do we do that? Well, it's like this, we're going to make a charge for that service, but here is what happens to that money. Out of the goodness of our hearts or desire to get the show on the road, we'll pay the cost and the toll out of our own pockets to put that loyalty oath under the hands of all the psychologists in any area, as by the way — find — and psychiatrists — as discoverable in the telephone book Yellow Pages. See in any given area you just look up in the telephone book Yellow Pages, and you look 'em up and send one to each one. Wait a certain period of time, find out those you don't hear from. Call them up and say, "What's the matter?" The — a lot of them will sign. But those who refuse to, hah, we want the fact that they refused, and if that person is in an important position, such as head of the local society — one Scientologist accompanied by another one can walk in with the loyalty oath and say, "Here's this loyalty oath, and you didn't sign it and send it back to us in the mails. Don't you want to sign it?" And the fellow will say, "No! I refuse to have anything to do with it!!" And you say, "That's fine, that's fine. You refuse to sign it, is that correct?" It is all they do, see? Nice and pleasant. And the fellow says, "That's right! Bong! Bong!" Two witnesses, they take the oath, they fill the guy's name in here "I (whatever the fellow's name was)" and over here say, "refuse to sign, (such-and-such a date) in the presence of…” — and sign the two witnesses. And we here in Washington will compile the ledger sheet of these and when we are all through, and this is all done, and if we are a little bit industrious, it will only take a few months.

Now, this particular trick particularly applies to those psychologists who will be chosen on the Board of Examiners of the California Board as recently formed by Public Bill 2712, California Legislature, or 3712. They recently passed a bill saying only psychologists could practice psychology. Good! "Psyche" means spirit! So a fellow who isn't working in the field of the spirit isn't a psychologist.

But what we want to have happen to those examiners is that a couple of Scientologists walk in to the office of each one of 'em when they are chosen and have them refuse to sign that, and then inform the governor and the legislature that they have chosen people who are disloyal to the United States to serve on that bill! And keep doing this until we get some psychologists that are favorable.

This thing's got teeth in it, because these people have an awful time trying to explain why they are attacking American psychology. There is such a thing as American psychology; its right name is Dianetics.

But when these fellows lift their heads and say, "Admiral of the National Academy of American Psychology, they're no good — they're — they're no good. They're no good — they're no — well wait a — they're — boom." I'm afraid we have a muzzler. I'm afraid they'll have to keep their mouths shut. Oh, they won't; they won't, there'll be some screaming about it, but I don't think there's any personal danger in it at all, I think there's mild routine clerical action. And this organization being a national organization simply undertook the job of ascertaining the loyalty of various psychologists, psychiatrists and psychoanalysts in the United States and validated their qualifications, said whether their qualifications were real or not, that's all the organization did. You see? And here's the list of the fellows that signed and here's the list of the fellows that didn't sign. Now, I wouldn't go so far as to deport these fellows that didn't sign. I …

But I think that we can use this factor of loyalty and all of that sort of thing to clean up the field. It happens to mesh. It happens to make good sense and it happens to be doable, and the forces of law and order, I think, will find it impossible to understand why somebody wouldn't sign that oath of mental practice. It's totally reasonable to a law enforcement officer.

Whereas you and I know positively something else. We know these people even though they are good Americans have been schooled totally in some university that taught them "that IQ couldn't change." That taught them, "that personality could not be altered." That taught them that "brainwashing was the very thing to do." That taught them the work of Pavlov, the work of Wundt, had never been surpassed in any way, and taught them above and beyond that contempt for anyone and everyone working newly in American research. The country could lose its next war because it has a disloyal, uninformed profession called psychology in its midst. You don't think the Russians exported it, do you?

They didn't even export brainwashing as far as Korea. The boys that were doing brainwashing in Korea were not experts; there're probably far more expert brainwashers around the Kremlin, they got much better results; they get about a 100 percent nervous breakdown and total confession on the part of everybody they treat. But I don't think that's good for a man. To have loose upon him the only quote — mental practice as something that can drive him into a nervous breakdown or wreck him.

Did you ever run into a psychoanalytical patient who wasn't being careful! And if he was — if he went on being careful for years, he might be all right. Have you ever run into these people? And so on. It's not good for people. We don't care whether it's good for them or bad for them. They can go right on teaching all about it and go right on teaching it as long as they don't try to use it on us and make us believe that it is an exclusive thing and that they have a total monopoly on study, research and practice in the field of the human mind and spirit, when they don't even practice in that field.

Now this does not make or put Scientology underneath psychology. It does not do that. It is simply an effort to clean up the field from one end to the other; that's all.

We want them to sign the mental oath and then we want them to get their qualifications validated.

Now, why do we want this certificate? Why do we want this certificate? Well, we have another problem. We've had universities for decades issuing degrees in philosophy with a psychology major which taught in the main only Russian-European works, so that these degrees are kicking around as the only recognized degrees in the subject. But the fellow who holds them can't do anything. Sooner or later the whole field is going to collapse unless somebody takes a bolster in it and we have a vested interest in keeping the public credence alive.

Therefore if we issue these validation of qualifications, you understand this is not — this is not a certificate guaranteeing anything but the fact that the guy is qualified. Do you understand that? We validate his existing credentials. Do you see that? This is not credentials; this merely validates his existing credentials.

We will take all of the money collected for this certificate; it will cost a Scientologist about 25 dollars; it will cost a psychologist, when you finally get around to reaching him with it, about $80. You will, you'll have to examine him. He says he's an expert in yoga, all right he is an expert in yoga, you go, "Fine," crack a book on yoga and see if he knows his business. If he doesn't know his business in yogi, flunk him.

We're being reasonable! But we'll take all of that money, and with money maybe from another source, and we will publish in such publications as The Saturday Evening Post, Time magazine and all the rest of them a picture of this certificate, saying, "Be sure that your mental practitioner has one."

Now "live and let live" is a very fine philosophy; there's nothing wrong with live and let live as a philosophy until you try to apply it to a mad dog. And you pat the mad dog on the head and say, "Well, you can go on living" and he bites your hand off. Right? So there is a point where live and let live can't go forward. But there is a also a point where reasonability enters and punishment or duress begins.

We cannot afford to take somebody who is perfectly willing to go along with this program and clean up psychology and just because he doesn't believe in us, or our school, knock his head off. Do you get the idea? This is not a promotion of Scientology — it's not a promotion of Dianetics — it's trying to keep these boys from muddying up the field and stopping us from getting a show on the road. And we are perfectly willing from where I sit that anybody practice anything he cares to practice as long as he practices it within the framework of that mental oath. Because we don't want people practicing who kill people. We don't want people practicing who rob families of their last penny and then throw the guy into the local state institution. We don't want people in practice that evaluate-evaluate- evaluate and mess up cases.

One thing, we're trying to get a show on the road. Every now and then these people circulate around into our hands. Every now and then we get an ex-electric shock case, unbeknownst to us, we suddenly have in the organization an electric shock case. We didn't take this person aboard to a — as a psychotic. We took this person to improve his capabilities and to make him a little more able to live, and all of a sudden we are having to undo for almost the totality of the intensive, the quote-treatment-unquote, the actual brutality rendered by some psychiatrist that didn't even know the difference.

I knew of a girl one time went into a psychiatric office, I think to deliver a letter, and they set her down in the chair and gave her an electric shock. They thought she was a patient.

There is one that I didn't put in there, which would have been very, very interesting to do so. There's one I didn't put in there. "That a practitioner must be willing to receive the treatment he administers."

Male voice: Put it in there Ron.

I suppose it ought to be in there.

Audience voices: Yes.

Well, if you say so — why then we'll republish it on a later edition and include that one in.

Okay.

Now, this is no effort to get people in Scientology to sign an oath of allegiance to the United States or anything of the sort. It would be a good thing, however, if it were signed by people in Scientology, because therefore they weren't — that would have been processed. If for any reason one doesn't want to sign an oath of allegiance to the United States that's perfectly all right. Nobody is forcing anybody to sign this. We would not even take note of it in Scientology if one did not want to sign it. I'm making that very clear because these things can become ways and means of duress and so on which they shouldn't.

But I'll tell you this: The exact program which we have laid down here at this moment is this. I think there is in existence in the back of the hall a membership card for each and every one of you in the NAAP already typed and signed. Is that correct?

Dr. Elliott has them and there's a card. The card doesn't cost you anything at all and all you have to do, and this sounds like it's a pitch of some sort or another, but it isn't, all you have to do is sign your name on it and have the next two guys in line sign as witnesses real quick as a bunny and hand this in which is an application for membership, don't you see, sign your name on this and your signature at the bottom, hand it in and they'll hand you your membership card. It's as easy as that. We are bribing you to come to this congress, see. If you want one of those cards it's yours. You don't have to have one, but if you want one it is yours and your name's already typed up back there and you are a member of this organization.

Well, what is a member of this organization? It is simply a person who has subscribed to the policies and has sworn the mental oath in the field of psychology; that's all. It does not make him a psychologist. Got that? So that's all yours from me to you.

Now, if you also want to pick up one of these things and you are qualified to Scientology, you can at once, for this excellent reason, that we have all of your qualifications here; those of you who are qualified in Scientology, we know it, we have records on the subject, and you can pick those up at once.

I am not stressing that — you don't have to pick one of these up at all, ever. But I'm just telling you that it is available for you. Because we want you, to hand these out across America. Got that?

Well, I take it that you find some favor in this program. Huh? Good.

I take it that there is then some willingness to participate in this program.

All right, then do I take it that you have volunteered to participate to some degree in this program?

Audience voices: Yeah, yes.

Okay, here's a map of the United States, we've already assigned the areas to the various people.

Now, you don't have to have those districts; it was just made sure that somebody in the congress was covering each part of the United States so we'd have it covered, but for heaven sakes take it up if you don't want this, and you want to pass it along, or if you want to deputize somebody and hold onto your appointment, because it's yours otherwise.

Now, what is a person expected to do if he was so appointed. You don't have to have this. Those are conditional appointments.

What are you expected to do? Actually expected to simply mail (this is one of the easiest things you ever heard of) you're simply expected to mail one of these (you will have to pick up a number of folders for your area) one of these — National Academy of American Psychology — and all you are is a District Director, and you have to mail one of these to every name and address for a psychologist, a psychiatrist, or psychoanalyst in the area given. And you can get them out of yellow phone books and you can get them from other sources, but you simply send one of these to each one, and then note that you have sent them to each one.

They will send them back with an application of membership filled out and signed, or they won't return them at all. Now, at the moment they don't return them at all after a reasonable length of time, you call their attention to it again and get a refusal by mail if possible. You are after refusals. No further responsibility settles upon your back at all.

When that job is done, there is another job that you can do. And that is simply to offer these people a certificate of validation of qualifications. It costs money and they'd have to come in and examine it. A certain amount of that money would stay in your hands as having examined it. All the remainder of that money would be invested in advertising to say, "That your psychologist, psychiatrist or psychoanalyst should be a loyal American." Got it?

That's all there is to the job; there's nothing else. It's just a job of dissemination. It's clerical just like I told you. See? There isn't any beating the drum or making any speeches or anything else. It's just mail them out, note when you don't get them back, check those that never replied and we will probably do the rest.

Sooner or later you will have to appoint a couple of people in your area to go and call on the ones who occupy high official posts to have them sign or refuse to sign before witnesses. You understand that? That is a special operation which comes at the tail end of this other operation.

And if you do this clerical operation in your immediate area or get this clerical operation done, do you know what we'll wind up with? We will wind up with the largest numerical strength organization in the field of psychology, and can thereafter talk with authority on the ethics of its practice and teachings in the United States.

And there would be an end to this shotgunning. Every time somebody desires to help his fellow human being, why we can end this idea that he should be shot down. That's a very totalitarian sort of an idea. You know? That you should be punished for wanting to help your fellow man. I think that's how they make slaves.

Now, we are not actually fighting the APAs. You want to know what their position might be in relationship to this? American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association. If they were either of them American associations, they would have done this a long time ago. They were the people in charge and responsible for this. They did not do their job obviously because mental practice is in a muddy state in the United States.

I do know, however, that they have called up before their ethics committee people who have dared to practice a subject not ratified by them! They have actually called up psychologists for trying to test or do something with Dianetics. So they are not representative of psychology in the United States! They are representative only of a certain school or a certain series of schools of psychology in the United States.

If anything, they represent the "academic psychologist" — if they totally represent him. But if they had done this job, we would not be doing this job now! Do you see that? So therefore it's plain that they are not representative of psychology and psychiatry in the United States. Actually, their membership is in a minority. There are many, many people who are outside the field of their membership. This is quite interesting. I am not even condemning these organizations and not even trying to shoot them from guns, because Saturday morning a letter left the NAAP for the American Psychiatric Association and another letter left the NAAP for the American Psychological Association, headquarters of which are both — are in Washington, giving them a copy of this oath and asking them how many they needed to circulate their membership for us! Let me tell you a trick. You do not begin a pan-determined operation by counting a lot of people out. You understand that? So we have no intentions of kicking around or reviling either of these organizations, unless of course, they refuse and block to subscribe to any higher ethical levels, at which time it is my belief that they cease to be classified as scientists and must be classified only as subversives and butchers.

But remember we are not going to call them subversives and butchers until they call them that, themselves — first. And I don't think it will ever come to this pass.

This is what I hope to have happen, plotting the future course. I would consider it a disaster if the APAs each of them got a copy of this oath, looked it over and said, "Ha! Ha. Neah." and threw it in the wastebasket and said nothing.

Or looked at this oath and said, "Rahh! Rowl! Under no circumstances will we have anything to do with this mental oath and put into our hands the evidence that we could not do otherwise with — than destroy them." It's highly possible that they may each of us — each of them write a letter saying they wish nothing whatsoever to do with a higher standard of practice. Because those who are trying to succumb usually do when you give them a chance.

But I would consider either of those things a disaster, so mark me well. I expect them to write back and say, "This isn't too bad. Who the hell are you? If you care to make a few changes we could subscribe to this ourselves." Do you get the thing and argue around and go into communication about it until we got both of these organizations to force upon their membership something as good as this, and boy, would we have had it made. We'd have it made then, totally.

But these organizations have never been pan-determined. They have closed out of existence practically every fellow in the United States who wished to work in the field of counseling who did not have university training, of five or six years in the subject. Now, that isn't right, because it precludes [presumes] the fact that the universities are teaching how to counsel. See that? That's an unreasonable assumption.

If a university teaches nothing but Wundt and Pavlov and the parts of the brain, then it doesn't look to me that the university training would qualify one to practice in the field of the mind. Don't you see? But the legislators and other people are assuming that that is the case.

So as a result you have probably two-thirds of those people interested in counseling and mental practice in the United States already excluded out of these two organizations: The American Psychiatric, the American Psychological, so it's no wonder the thing has gotten into bad shape, if there is no organization that is setting a standard of ethics for practice.

If they have psycho-quacks on their hands that they are worried about, they have only themselves to blame. I have tested this time after time after time in Dianetics and Scientology. Cancelling a certificate because of reported misconduct. That action has never brought with it anything but enturbulence. It has never corrected anything, and that's because 99 percent of the guy's actions were always dictated by his interpretation of the decent thing to do. These people were acting as they thought best for all hands, always. And none of them merited any such punishment.

Therefore I wrote the PAB, "The Rights of the Field Auditor." Remember it? Which you can get a copy of back there. I found out there was no slightest benefit in doing so. The only thing that one could do that had any efficacy at all was to tell the fellow what you meant by ethics; instead of hiding the standard, display one. Don't work from a hidden standard, work from a displayed standard. And say, "Look, you will get along better if you don't do so-and-so and so-and-so. Do you understand? And if you do so-and-so and so-and-so you will find that's a little higher ethical standard and you will get along better."

And I have never had anything but a "Thank you," when I have told somebody that, and I have never had anything but enturbulence and a kick in the teeth when we cancelled somebody's certificate and tried to punish them. Do you understand?

We evidently can't punish into better conduct anybody! But we can educate people into what better conduct is, as we have found it, and leave it up to their determinism, whether or not they will find it better and then we can improve a field.

And so it is with the NAAP. This is an educative move, not a judicial, and treated in that spirit and circulated and disseminated throughout the United States, it is liable to have a rather fantastic impact even if people just read it and never sign it. They will say, "Look that is a standard of practice. Oh, this is something that people would be expected to measure up to. Fine." Or, "Gosh, that's awfully stiff." But it could not do otherwise than increase the ethical standards of the field of practice of mental practitioners. Any way you look at it and anything we do with it. Do you understand that?

It's not a punitive move; it is an educative move. Its total conduct is clerical; we merely want it to disseminate it.

And any one of you who care to become a member of it now will find right at the back of the room there plenty of these laid out, these oaths, all he has to do is sign and get another couple of guys to sign, fill out the membership blank on the back. And if you want your qualifications validated or anything like that so you'll have something — well you can get one of those too. I am not urging that upon you in any way. It doesn't cost you anything.

I think if we get an agreement on this — we get a show on the road, I think that mental practice in the United States can be something to be proud of instead of something to be ashamed of.

And I think that unless we get something like high ethical practice going in the United States that the science of the mind is doomed. It won't last out public opinion when the public finds out.

Therefore, for self-preservation and all other reasons, I recommend to you the National Academy of American Psychology, and I hope you do well with it.

Thank you.