DMSH 1950 Book 1 Chapter 4

← Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health (1950)

The Four Dynamics

In the original equations of dianetics, when the research was young, it was believed that survival could be envisioned in personal terms alone and still answer all conditions. A theory is only as good as it works. And it works as well as it explains observed data and predicts flew material which will be found, in fact, to exist.

Survival in personal terms was computed until the whole activity of Man could be theoretically explained in terms of self alone. The logic looked fairly valid. But then it was applied to the world. Something was wrong: it did not solve problems. In fact, the theory of survival in personal terms alone was so unworkable that it left a majority of behavior phenomena unexplained. But it could be computed and it still looked good.

Then it was that a nearly intuitive idea occurred. Man’s understanding developed in ratio to his recognition of his brotherhood with the Universe. That was high flown but it yielded results.

Was Man himself a brotherhood of Man? He had evolved and become strong as a gregarious being, an animal that hunted in packs. It seemed possible that all his activities could be computed in terms of the survival of the group. That computation was made. It looked good. Man survived, it was postulated, solely in terms of the survival of his group. It looked good but it left a majority of observed phenomena unexplained.

It was attempted, then, to explain Man’s behavior in terms of Mankind alone; which is to say, it was assumed that Mankind survived for Mankind in a highly altruistic way. This was straight down the sylvan path of Jean Jacques Rousseau. It could be computed that Man lived alone for the survival of all Mankind. But when addressed to the laboratory — the world — it did not work.

Finally, it was recalled that some had thought that Man’s entire activity and all his behavior could be explained by assuming that he lived for sex alone. This was not an original assumption. But some original computations were made upon it and it is true that, by a few quick twists of the equation, his survival activity can be made to resolve on only the sexual basis. But when this was applied to observed data, again it failed to explain every phenomenon.

An examination was made of what had been attempted. It had been assumed that Man survived only for himself as an individual; it had been computed that he survived only for the group, the pack, for society; it had been postulated that he survived only for Mankind; and finally, it had been theorized that he lived only for sex. None worked alone.

A new computation was made on the survival dynamic. Exactly for what was man surviving? All four of these factors, self, sex, group and Mankind were entered into a new equation. And now it was found, a theory was in hand which worked. It explained all observed phenomena and it predicted new phenomena which were discovered to exist. It was a scientific equation, therefore!

From the survival dynamic, in this fashion, were evolved the four dynamics. By survival dynamic was meant the basic command, SURVIVE! which underlay all activity. By dynamic was meant one of the four purpose divisions of the entire dynamic principle. The four dynamics were not new forces; they were sub-divisions of the primary force.

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.

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.

Life, the atom and the universe and energy itself are included under the symbiotic classification.

It will be seen immediately that these four dynamics are actually a spectrum without sharp division lines. The survival dynamic can be seen to sweep out from the individual to embrace the entire species and its symbiotes.

None of these dynamics is necessarily stronger than any of the others. Each is strong. They are the four roads a man takes to survival. And the four roads are actually one road. And the one road is actually a spectrum of thousands of roads contained within the four. They are all in terms of past, present and future in that the present may be a sum of the past and the future may be the product of the past and present.

All the purposes of Man can be considered to lie within this spectrum and all behavior becomes explained.

That Man is selfish is a valid statement when one means an aberrated Man. That Man is anti-social is an equally valid statement if one adds the modifier, aberration. And other such statements resolve equally. * The dianetic meaning of symbiote is extended beyond the dictionary definition to mean “any or all life or energy forms which are mutually dependent for survival.” The atom depends on the Universe, the Universe on the atom.

Now it happens that these four dynamics can be seen to compete, one with another, in their operation within an individual or a society. There is a rational reason for this. The phrase “social competition” is a compound of aberrated behavior and sentient difficulties.

Any man, group or race may be in contest with any race, group or man and even in contest with sex on an entirely rational level.

The Equation of the Optimum Solution would be that a problem has been well resolved which portends the maximum good for the maximum number of dynamics. That is to say that any solution, modified by the time available to put the solution into effect, should be creative or constructive for the greatest possible number of dynamics. The optimum solution for any problem would be a solution which achieved the maximum benefit in all the dynamics. This means that a man, determining upon some project, would fare best if he benefited everything concerned in the four dynamics as his project touched them. He would then have to benefit himself as well for the solution to be optimum. In other words, the benefiting of the group and Mankind dynamic but the blocking of the sex dynamic and the self dynamic would be much poorer than the best solution. The conduct survival pattern is built upon this equation of the optimum solution. It is the basic equation of all rational behavior and is the equation on which a clear functions. It is inherent in Man.

In other words, the best solution to any problem is that which will bring the greatest good to the greatest number of beings, including self, progeny, family associates, political and racial groups, and at length to all mankind. The greatest good may require, as well, some destruction, but the solution deteriorates in a ratio to the destructiveness employed. Self- sacrifice and selfishness are alike reductive of the optimum action equation and alike have been suspected and should be.

This is entirely a matter of: does it work? Even on an unaberrated basis there are times when one or another of these dynamics rave to be dropped from the computation of some activity or other and indeed, few problems are so entirely intense that they must take into account the dynamics. But when a problem achieves such intensity and time is not an important factor, serious errors can follow the omission of one or another of the dynamics from the factors considered.

In the case of a Napoleon “saving France” at the expense of the remainder of Mankind in Europe, the equation of the optimum solution was so far neglected that all the revolutionary gains of the French people were lost. In the case of Caesar “saving Rome,” the equation was so poorly done that the survival of Rome was impeded.

But there are special cases when the equation of the optimum solution becomes so involved with time that certain dynamics must be neglected to permit other dynamics to persist. 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.

Many examples of various kinds could be cited where one or another of the dynamics must, of necessity, receive priority, all on an entirely rational basis.

On an aberrated basis the equation is still valid but complicated by irrationalities which have no part of the situation. Many solutions are bad merely because of false educational data or no data at all. But these are still solutions. In the case of aberrated solutions, the dynamics are actually and actively impeded, as will later be outlined in full.