Ray Peat newsletter, 1971. From The Collected Works of Ray Peat.

Ray Peat, "Response to \"A New Look at the Meaning of Reality\"", p. 1426

Science News, Volume 99, Number 26, June, 1971

our article, “A New Look at the Meaning of Reality,”1 was interestY ing, but uninformed. Some criticisms: These ideas are not so new, at least when compared with what you call “traditional behaviorism.” You seem to be trying to give the impression that these humanistic psychologists are emotional rebels against staid, sane and scientific traditionalists like Skinner, and that a theory is just now being created for them. Kurt Goldstein (The Organism) apparently coined the phrase “self actualization,” which was central to Maslow’s very biological but also social psychology. Whitehead and the Gestalt psychologists showed several decades ago that consciousness shouldn’t be thrown out of biology and psychology. Carl Rogers (e.g., Client-Centered Therapy, 1951) did very coherent theoretical as well as sound empirical work which led to the interest in group therapy and the awareness of the social implications of therapy. Merleau-Ponty and Michael Polanyi have provided very broad critiques of the pseudo-objectivity that Laing refers to.

Newspaper Excerpts

A la Carnegie The charitable Carnegie FounEugene Register-Guard, November 15, 1984 dation was a pioneer in attempts to eliminate poverty by eliminat-

T he Election Day announce ment that the U.S. government is considering an invasion ing the poor. Their theory was that poverty was genetic. What is your theory of poverty? And why do of Nicaragua was reported in you believe American compassion the Wednesday Register-Guard,† couldn’t eliminate starvation? which also editorially advised read- If compassion consisted of ers that “American compassion withdrawing military support from cannot prevent death through star- brutal dictatorships around the vation…in famine-ridden coun- world, people could begin to feed tries…” yet pointed out that they themselves. could relieve their consciences by It is no threat to me that supporting soup-kitchen charities Nicaraguans are learning to read at home and abroad. and to cooperate with each other After your endorsement of Rea- in overcoming poverty. Unfortugan, I suppose you feel the way An- nately, it seems to threaten Reagan drew Carnegie did when he said: and his supporters. “To continue much longer with most of my thoughts wholly upon Almost Anyone the way to make more money in the Eugene Register-Guard, October 15, 1976 shortest time, must degrade me beyond hope of permanent recovery.” Your editorial reaction is clas- P ro-nuclear scientists, espe cially when their income de pends on it, can behave oddly. In sical. Harming people who are attempting to feed themselves, and the 1950s, the program that meathen publicly advocating “charity.” sured bomb fallout was named Two hundred years ago, such “Project Sunshine,” and some govdeceit was understood by honest ernment scientists even claimed people. William Blake wrote: “Pity that fallout was good for us, “bewould be nor more if we did not cause radiation produced evolumake somebody poor.” tion.” At least, they assured us,

† “Millions Are Starving,” Eugene Register-Guard, November 7, 1984.

Bad Partnership 1413

a little radiation wasn’t harmful. Everyone in the world is going Some “experts” still claim that the to be involved in the outcome of Hiroshima bomb didn’t cause mea- our nuclear energy decisions, and surable genetic harm, but to reach the way many physicists are actthis conclusion, people who were ing, almost anyone’s opinion seems upwind from the explosion have to more reliable. be averaged in. The experts in nuclear energy Bad Partnership often find it profitable to disre- Eugene Register-Guard, March 30, 1985 gard the public’s safety. More than our article† discussing a con60,000 drums of radioactive waste were dumped in the ocean near the Y spiracy to promote the use of poison sprays, illuminates a more U.S. coasts, and after years of such general problem. There is a trend disposal, divers investigated and toward a kind of partnership befound the barrels had been crushed tween some big universities and by pressure, allowing the radioac corporations which use new techtive material to escape. Could nologies; the people involved asthis be considered “accidental” pol sure us that this trend will benefit lution? According to “Industrial the public—the consumers—but Research,” nuclear accidents have there is a good reason to doubt their been increasing recently; however, objectivity and their correctness. much pollution is “permissible,” A Central California farmer rather than accidental. One gov who changed from chemical to ernment plant measures its daily organic methods, and now sells emissions in terms of pounds of most of his products competitively uranium. to the ordinary supermarkets, has Establishment physicists claim pointed out that the state universithat their knowledge is complete ties which have spent so much pubenough to prevent miscalculations, lic money to promote the agriculbut a State Department official has tural methods favored by the chempointed out that nuclear test blasts ical industry had absolutely no inhave been unpredictable in size. formation to offer him to help in his Anderson and Spangler have pre conversion to completely natural sented evidence which contradicts methods. By eliminating the use the basic assumption on which nu of expensive chemicals, he saved clear reaction rates are calculated. enough to compete effectively in † Bill Bishop, “State Accused of ‘Spray Scam’,” Eugene Register-Guard, March 15, 1985.

the market, in spite of the large re- Some cities have banned the search establishment which works use of lead in gasoline. Why hasn’t closely with his competitors. Eugene? How much more cheaply could he produce food if he could have Dangerous Therapy the advantage of research financed Eugene Register-Guard, May 23, 1985 largely by the public? If the state universities act as agents of the chemical industry, I hope that the kind of informa tion Sarah Stewart provides in her long reply to Mr. Frank’s letshould they receive public money? ter† is not the kind of information Public finance should function as that doctors give to patients in oba counter-balance to the private taining their “informed consent.” money which buys the research it In such drastic and permawants. Entire institutions can be nent “therapies” as electroconvulswayed by the financial leverage of sion and “leukotomy” or “psytheir “patrons.” chosurgery,” practically no prop When professors, who are erly controlled studies have been agents of the state, accept any re done. In one controlled study, the search funds from private industry, electrodes were applied to the paand then participate in any govern tients’ legs, instead of to the head, ment decision which affects the and the beneficial effects were just profits of that industry, it certainly as good—and the risk of brain damdoesn’t look good… age was obviously less. Physicians Ban Lead are careful to warn the public of Eugene Register-Guard, July 13, 1977 the need for controlled studies be fore therapies using natural sub-

L ead pollution can cause men tal retardation, hyperkinetic behavior disorders, anemia, bone stances can be accepted; shouldn’t removal of part of the brain have an equivalent scientific evaluation? disease, and accelerated aging and The judgment of the person who degeneration of various tissues. administers the treatment is ofChildren are most vulnerable to ten accepted in evaluating “psylead poisoning. Leaded gasoline is chosurgery.” the main source of lead pollution. The machines for administer ing electroshock were required by

† Sarah Stewart, “Mental Health Care has Improved,” Eugene Register-Guard, May 17, 1985.