From the foreword
Psychological relativity is a simple, almost self-evident causal truth. It is also utterly unacceptable to man. Further, it offers full, though simple, causal explanations for all organic reactions, including psychological experiences. At the same time, modern psychology is clearly lacking a basic causal insight; it is, rather, sinking into mere complexities of enormous, contradictory learning.
Whenever such conditions have existed, in any field, the “impossible” simple explanations have offered the unexpected answers. For just this reason, psychological relativity — perhaps the most “impossible” but also most inclusive of such simple explanations—is worth looking into. It certainly is too unacceptable as well as common-place to appear “scientific,” even apart from any shortcomings in its presentation. But it offers a mechanistic explanation for every present mystifying psychological phenomenon, including the ingenuity and persistence with which a person brings on himself the reactions he wants least. Thus the virtual mysteries of contemporary psychology, like the hidden life of the Subconscious, can all be explained fully for the first time by mechanistic causes.
Parts of the last chapters of this book go beyond psychology. They are added to verify the relative insight against other knowledge, as well as to show its full significance.
Actually, the widest importance of the relative insight is that it reveals the fundamental causal law for all human sciences. These sciences have not become scientific and cannot do so as long as all theory remains averse to the “impossible” ideas of relative causation, which governs all organic reactions of body and mind. These reactions determine everything in all fields of human adjustment—from medicine to political science. But in all such reactions the positive value or satisfaction derives from the negative value, nonsatisfaction or need. Yet man, or the scientist, has never recognized that the causal source of the positive, which lie values, seeks and notices, is the negative which he rejects, ignores and never logically connects with its opposite.