Volume 10, Issue 1, page 6

even try to? As Steam says: "Nostradamus, of to be the conclusion Steam has reached, that
course, saw an apparent space conflict not "the future stretches on virtually endlessly,
very far off, but despite his record in the despite a few possibly unpleasant interludes,
past for accuracy, few will believe him. I find and the order is already established. Nothing
this difficult to accept myself, any more than we can do, perhaps, shall change it."
as a very young man I could accept the fact In closing, Stearn quotes the Catholic
that I would some day die. In the same way, I "saint" Thomas Aquinas, that Go d receives no
cannot take Edgar Cayce seriously when he tells news from the world, and nothing surprises Him.
of the imminent destruction of New York City "If two servants, who do not know they need
and the two great cities of the West Coast. It meet, are sent by their master to the same
matters not how right, again, Cayce has been place, the meeting of the two servants, if rein the past." ferred to themselves, is by chance, but as
And again: "Regardless of the evidence or compared to the master who had ordered it, it
proof, many people will never take seriously is directly intended."
reported instances of psychic phenomena or We disagree -- and fortunately we can do this
any other phenomena that defies explanation by today without being burned at the stake. Howtheir five senses. As a matter of fact, even ever -- altho we know no more for certain than
when the phenomenon has been established to Aquinas did -- our own un sainted aberrations
the satisfaction of some of these senses -- eyes dictate to us that we have more choice in this
and ears, for example -- they still will sneer." game of life than if we were actors in a motion picture film -- whose only chance of evadMaybe we don't like to accept "evidence" of ing their performance is an accidental fire in
accurate precognition because of what it may the projection booth.
portend -- that the future already is fixed and To think otherwise is to accept fatalism --
we are not masters of our fate; that we do not and relax -- since "what is to be, will be". It
have any choice but to follow the groove that sounds like an excellent excuse for those seekleads from the cradle to the grave. This seems ing a way to dodge responsibility. -- Trah Nika.

URPOSE of this article is to correct a false
impression that some readers of The ABERREE may have -- namely, that Synergetics is
in some way an offshoot of Dianetics and
Scientology. I object strongly to this
representation because it is not true, because it is an insult to me personally, and
because it creates difficulties for Synergeticists.

I realize that my enemies, and those who
wish to destroy or invalidate Synergetics, will
continue their attacks regardless of what I
might say. I hope, however, that the openminded reader will give my viewpoint a fair
hearing, and that whatever his judgment may be,
he will at least communicate to others my objection to such a characterization of Synergetics, whenever the topic is brought up.

The reason for this impression is plausible
enough. It derives from the fact that I once
investigated Dianetics and that, impressed by
the gallant effort of Don Purcell to save the
Dianetic Research Foundation and angered by
the despicable attacks made upon him at the
time, I tried, informally, to help him. This
was in the period 1950-1953.

This was prior to the definitive emergence
of Synergetics as a science. The first essay
on Synergetics was written early in 1953, and
privately distributed to afew friends. (It has
been reprinted in the December, 1962, issue of
CHANGE . ) When I realized the significance of
this development, I told Don it would be necessary for me to terminate my efforts in his
behalf , that Synergetics was an independent
science in its own right, and must develop according to its own laws.

I never at any time had any relation with
L.Ron Hubbard. I never took any of his courses
or received any of his "degrees". I've never
even met him. And I never was interested in
Scientology -- I rejected it in toto as soon as
I found out what it was.

As for Dianetics, obviously it didn't work --
for me, at least. My evaluation of it was that
what was good in it wasn't new and what was
new in it wasn't good. Others may have a different evaluation, but that is their experience. I reject it in toto. I have no need for
any of its ideas and techniques. I remember it
primarily as a source of misery and heartache.
I wish I'd never heard of it.

So much for my personal association with
Dianetics. The ideas and tools of Synergetics
have developed along quite a different path.

Many of the ideas of Synergetics are not
new. The term "synergy" was derived from medicine, where it refers to the co-operative action of two drugs or of two or more muscles
about a joint. The idea of synergy itself goes
back to the early Greeks, and even further in
the civilization of the East.

What is new about Synergetics is the discovery of the synergic mode of function. Everyone experiences the phenomenon of synergy at
one time or another. The tools of Synergetics
-- when used with precision -- evoke synergy so
often it reaches a continuous flow. And this
flow, when it occurs, is a new form of experience.

The basic tool of Synergetics -- tracking --
was not drawn from Dianetics. Rather it was
inspired by James Harvey Robinson, whose book,
"The Mind in the Making", written in the
1930's, exerted a strong influence upon me. I
have yet to see a Dianeticist -- or Scientologist -- use this tool properly. The reason for
this is easy to see -- it is basically incompatible with the basic Dianetic technique, "running it out". ("Running" is itself derived
from an early psychiatric technique, called
"the cathartic method" by some authors.)
From a logical standpoint, Synergetics is
closely related to psychoanalysis, general semantics, the theory of emergent evolution,
Gestalt Psychology, and Cybernetics. To these
fields, I can honestly pay tribute.

But if I were to be asked, "What worthwhile
idea or technique did you first honestly hear
about in Dianetics?" I would have to answer,