This next subject you could call the goal of processing — in other words, what you are trying to do. This has something to do with the ideal state of man. A codification of an ideal state of man — highly ideal, with all of the meaning of ideal thrown in there — would be simply the top band of the Chart of Attitudes. That is an ideal state. Of course, it is very, very mpractlcal. Now, we are taking ideal as opposed to practical, but as an individual approaches this ideal state, he also goes into a practical state. There is a sort of automatic shift into an extroversion as he goes up to-ward this ideal state, and he will stay in a state of action. Life has sort of taken care of that.

It has taken me a long time to get the ammo stuffed into the breech, the pointer on his ledge, the trainer swiveled around in the right direction and get a hand on a lanyard.

You try to get him up the tone scale to this ideal state. If he has lots of circuits and he is pretty bogged and a lot of other things, you can try to beat it into his skull: “Survival is your right and infinite survival is your goal. Now, you understand that.”

I happen to believe in action — lots of action. As a “philosopher” I am a complete bust, because everything is all set for the philosopher if he is just permitted to think and maunder around and monkey around with something and write it down in a book, let the book get dusty and write some more and let that one get dusty and so on.

“Yes.”

I was interested in the field of engineering because engineers build things. I found out that when you tried to build things in this world the steel would stand up but the human beings wouldn’t. Isn’t that interesting? So I decided to do something about it if I possibly could. There wasn’t quite a bit done about it then, but the direction of it is action — definite action.

“Now, full responsibility is an ideal state. You understand that. You are fully responsible now, aren’t you?”

We have a world today where everybody is busy blowing each other up, with secret police running inside and outside and economics going up and down like barometers before a hurricane. People are shivering in their tracks, the workers are all throwing down their chains so people can put bigger chains upon them, institutions are being built to take care of the insane so that we can have more insane, people are being thrown on operating tables and hacked up, children get started into their lives with eight strikes against them and everybody is busy fighting for a little piece of dirt that is floating around in the solar system. What a limited view man has had!

“Yes.”

Trying to do something about that takes action.

“All right. I guess we got you there. Now, you are in a state of beingness, aren’t you? A complete state of beingness — you understand that?”

The production of an attitude of mind capable of constructively resolving the problems of man and delivering into his hands the conquest of the material universe happened to lie through the field of epistemology, and that channel went through the human mind. And that all leads out into action.

“Yes.”

So, this gun is pointed — laid, trained — loaded and cocked. It has taken a year and a half to find out how to tell people to do what, to produce a frame of mind which was up the tone scale.

“All right. You are in that state, aren’t you?”

But there is in existence now a package which handles this, with ramifications such that you in the field, wherever you are, are not occasioned too much turmoil or difficulty because of some alteration in the package. This bridge is built pretty wide now and as a net result we can be a cause which will undoubtedly produce at least a very interesting effect upon the society.

“Yes.” “You cause everything, don’t you?”

So when we think of cause and effect, the cause-and-effect situation in Dianetics is a very interesting one to examine. What are we trying to cause and what will be the effect? We can take that up a little later.

“Yes. Yes.”

Right now, let’s just take a look at the great purity of philosophy. I wish Kant were alive today, and Hegel and a few of the boys. Would they have fun: you would keep showing them phenomena and they would show you their mystic numbers.

“All right, you’re willing to accept the fact that you cause everything; you don’t desire not to be a cause on anything, do you?”

Of course, that kind of a situation can’t exist today; fortunately we have an enlightened world. You can show individuals phenomena and they immediately recognize them as phenomena and work with them — I wish!

“Well, this business about murdering little kids, I don’t . . .”

Cause and effect: Once upon a time there was a life source, and it developed into a more complex life source and that developed into a more complex life source. We can say that what it was trying to cause — one of the things it was trying to cause, certainly — was a conquest of the material universe. That may be just one of its goals but it is still a very important one. It is important because when you get an individual way up above 20.0, he starts to separate from the material universe. He is neither happy nor healthy nor anything else. Regardless of what he is trying to do, when he starts going out through the top he starts to leave the material universe and he ceases to gain in his conquest of it.

“Well, now, wait a minute. You realize that you cause everything and you . . .”

Now, when an individual goes down from 20.0 he also loses contact and loses the ability to handle the material universe.

“Yes.”

When you find a person operating at optimum — healthy, unworried, successful, everything running for him, things working — he is riding at about 20.0 or ten points to either side of it, and he is in good shape.

“Now, you understand that?”

We could get into a big argument about whether or not an individual is in good shape when he is healthy and strong and happy and effective and efficient and so forth. Maybe that individual isn’t in good shape; maybe the ideal would be something else. Maybe the ideal living organism would be something else. Possibly somebody could say, “Well, the ideal state is to sit on a bed of spikes and be able to resist the pain of the spikes.” Somebody else can do that if he wants to, but he sure isn’t going to get anything done!

“Yes.”

So what are we trying to cause? We will just postulate that it is the conquest of the material universe and when an individual begins to produce an effect, the effect he is producing — when it is a good effect — is an alignment of the inherent disorder in the physical universe.

“Okay! You’re in good shape. Get thee hence.”

When an individual fails as a cause, he becomes himself chaotic. His living body is part MEST; even his own MEST starts to demonstrate the chaotic effect of the material universe.

That would be an educational level of doingness. It has certain drawbacks. You are going to find a lot of preclears that are suddenly going to charge off at about 1.5 or something like that and say, “Well, I’m self-determined now!”

A very ideal situation would be to be pure cause but this is, of course, the ideal state of being, which is up above the level of the ideal state of action. If an individual is fully responsible, then the individual is full cause along all dynamics, isn’t he? If he is going to survive infinitely or something of that sort, he is again full cause. He says “I am” as his state of beingness. He goes into a big state of beingness, “I am.” That means “I am cause.”

Actually, the attributes of self-determinism are identical with the attributes of theta all the way up the line. But if you really boost somebody up this tone scale they are going to suddenly fly out of your hands someplace along the line. This is not out of orneriness or blame or something of the sort; they are just going to get very active. It doesn’t matter what they get active in; they get very active. They have hit somewhere around their tolerance of randomity and so forth; they are not introverted anymore. They extrovert. In other words, available energy is being applied to the world and people around them, rather than being applied to the past or even to any great degree the present. They do a lot of future planning, a lot of action; every effort is into the future.

We notice, as we look this over, that two things happen to a human being: he ceases to desire to be a cause or negates against being a cause, and he negates against being an effect. He does not want to be either a cause or an effect. He is a cause and something happens and it goes wrong and therefore it is fault, blame, regret and so forth. All of these things follow out from cause and he is in trouble. On the other hand, the individual does not want to be an effect of somebody else’s cause; he fends off from being this.

Let’s take this business of survival. It may be that an individual can say to himself “Well, I’m going to survive forever” and lay in a postulate of that character and go on and do so. For some reason or other, every once in a while somebody in the past has walked into a monastery or gotten interested in engineering design or begun to raise flowers and just sort of automatically done it.

But an individual can desire to be a cause and he can desire to be an effect. So actually this thing works out the way you have seen so many of these things work out.

By the way, pick up a Florist’s Guide sometime. These fellows are always in the future. They always want to see what is growing; they always want to see what is going to happen to these plants tomorrow. They have a couple of new breeds coming along and they are working out there in the slush and rain and going into the hot hothouse and out into the cold atmosphere all winter long. You would say, “Why, these guys would be in horrible condition.” No, they are not. You pick up a Florist’s Guide and the obituary in it says, “Smith, J: automobile wreck, age 96,” and so on. That is about the way those ages run — from 90 to about 110. This is really wonderful, and it is because their environment says “future” and of course their environment is actually full of life. They are growing things; their activity is very constructive.

Up along the top of the scale you have desired cause; below that you have enforced cause (that is blame) and still lower you have inhibited cause. And then you have desired effect, enforced effect and inhibited effect.

Now, you would expect a maternity ward to be a little bit grim here and there. But you take a really big maternity ward like the one in Bethesda Naval Hospitall (just why the navy has to have a maternity ward is beside the point, but it does have one; it is an enormous ward and all the senators’ wives and congressmen’s wives and admirals’ wives and second-class seamen’s wives go there and have their babies), you go by it in the elevator and if you see somebody from that floor, you really know it’s the maternity ward. The nurses are way up the tone scale, they are just beaming and full of smiles, energy, enthusiasm. It isn’t that it is well-managed; it is just that there is new life. They are dealing exclusively in futures — utterly and completely in physical, living futures.

Now, out of this formula — and you can call it a formula if you want to, because an awful lot of things work out when you start looking at this — come many complexities in the organization of living. Actually, it is a restatement of approval, regret, survive, full responsibility, full state of beingness and so forth. But it can be codified this way.

You see a little baby suddenly appear in the children’s ward behind the glass, and three or four days go by and the child’s head shape is getting a lot better. The fathers are nervous and that is something to be joked about. The mothers come out of it and they are glad to see their babies most of the time. The doctors, the interns and the nurses that work in this ward are just up in the clouds all the time. It is a very cheerful thing to walk through the corridors on that floor.

We are just making a restatement in terms of cause and effect. What is full responsibility? A fellow who is at full responsibility is willing to have caused anything, so that is way up top.

That is action in the physical universe having to do with futures, and that is an ideal state of mind; it reflects itself in being very healthy and so forth.

Desired cause: When you get an individual down the line to a point where he no longer desires to be cause, he is pretty badly off. When you take an individual and enforce the fact upon him that he is cause, just the act of enforcing it upon him is blaming; it says, “You’re cause” — and when he starts to blame himself finally, he comes down to the point where he won’t be cause for anything. He won’t be cause for the satisfaction of his own hunger. He won’t cause anything to happen.

Now, we are talking about an ideal state of being. A person to some degree, if he is in a happy state of mind, is right along that band. He is plotting into futures, he is working with futures, he is in action, he is traveling at a high level of motion. There isn’t very much in his environ that will block him, oddly enough; nothing much happens to him because he computes very easily on what is going to happen. He isn’t nervous about it. His computations are quite correct.

And then we have desired effect: You would be surprised how many effects there are that are desirable. There are the effects of food, clothing, shelter and pleasure. Individuals desire to be an effect.

We are a little bit out of luck in Dianetics to this degree: at least at this time, in order to make people progress into the future we have to handle a lot of past. We sometimes fail some individual. We try to do something for him and every once in a while we don’t do it and we blame ourselves for that and we go down the tone scale. This is a very bad business and it is something that an auditor should safeguard against.

The old mystic, the old-time ascetic, knew exactly how to get into a state of affairs where he went way up toward 40.0. He just said, “No pleasure, no effect — no effect of anything.” And of course, he went right on out through the top. He didn’t accept any cause on the line, particularly, but he refused to be an effect of any kind, and so there he went. You can see them today in India up in the highlands. They are very interesting people; of course, they don’t have much understanding of humanity. You go over there and you say, “It’s all right to be sitting there with your legs crossed, with the lice running up and down in the hems of your white robe, but it’s not my idea of a good way to live life” — nothing happens.

The funny part of it is that all the auditor has to do is keep himself up at a rather high level of motion and he can fail all over the place for quite a period of time before he has to be put back up there again. Remember, though, he has to be put back up there again.

The ascetic knows a lot better than to ever permit himself to be an effect of anything, because the second he permits himself to be an effect, he opens the door to somebody or something else’s cause.

Theoretically, he can reach that level and not be driven down from it again. No doubt this is the case, particularly if you review his whole lifetime and get it squared around.

There is contained in this all the ramifications of how you go about being a saint. And if you want to get there and become a saint, just close all those doors of effect and you will be a saint. (If you close the doors of food too, you will be a dead saint!)

But how do we go about both securing ourselves as auditors and securing our preclears into some action state of being? By motion, the handling of motion, action. Even if you are sitting around plotting and thinking and wondering and scratching your head about this and that, you can still indulge in some action. It is actually action to straighten out a preclear.

Now, on effect, a person has to agree to be aberrated. That, by the way, is in the first handbook; a person has to agree to be aberrated. Here is one of the methods he uses to agree: He wants to be affected this way and that way and some other way, and then some other way and some other way. Eventually he has the doors wide open and anything can roll down that channel. He starts to hit a dwindling spiral the moment he wants to be an effect.

Now, there is one little question in Dianetics that someday will get answered. Why do we have to handle any of a person’s yesterday to make him look into tomorrow? That is an interesting question. We can see as we look down a person’s life track that it is an awful lot of yesterday, and any time we take in trying to straighten out that yesterday is that much tomorrow that we haven’t been plotting into. So it is interesting: Why should we have to handle yesterday?

The young artist who says “Ah, I want to live! I want to know how life will affect me, and so forth” — he finds out. He stops painting too, because as long as he is an artist he is cause; as long as he is cause he is an artist. But when he becomes effect, he becomes chaotic, unplanning and so on.

When an individual is incapable of handling himself to his fullest extent and is being handled to a marked degree by his environment, the only way we know at this time to straighten him out is to straighten out the reasons why he cannot handle his own memory. We keep the environment from handling him by making it difficult for the environment to handle his memory.

Then there is the second dynamic. Poor old Freud: he was so close aboard the boat that I suppose that was why society got so mad at him. When he developed the libido theory he was looking right straight at this; there it was. You open the door to be an effect and you become one. What you do to become an effect becomes then the channel of aberration. An individual says, “I want to be affected pleasurably. I want to be very definitely and desperately affected,” and so forth, and it is very interesting that he will be affected by his counter-efforts and by everything else.

This is an indirect approach. It should not be lost sight of that it is an indirect approach, since that would occlude a future worker in these lines from suddenly blasting through with a technique which would have to do solely with now and tomorrow and which would just do a “yesterdayectomy” on the preclear.

We take the second dynamic: There is a solid communication line on the second dynamic — tactile. You want to know why so many men take their wives’ orders? They want to be an effect — they have a tactile communication line — and the wife says, “Go out and jump in front of the locomotive, please,” and they do. Why? They are an effect; therefore they have elected her to be cause, particularly if she is ornery about it. She is cause. If she can ever accomplish getting blamed on the second dynamic, she is really cause — her word is law! That is how blame operates. Anything you blame becomes cause; it becomes higher and more powerful than you and it can therefore and thereafter regulate you. You blame it — you say, “There’s cause” — and you are saying at the same time, “I’m not cause.” And thereafter from that source you get your orders.

There is a mechanical means of doing “yesterday-ectomies.” You see it all the time: The individual fails markedly and decides to be somebody else. He comes up on the other side as a valence shift. This was life’s rather poor answer to how to go about this. He goes through these failure cycles and comes up as somebody else.

If you want to know how to make an engram really effective against you, all you do is blame it on somebody. Blame its restimulation upon the auditor, blame a dental operation upon the dentist, and that engram — and dentists and auditors — thereafter will have a peculiarly powerful effect upon you.

Every once in a while an in dividual chan ge s his environ ment and changes his identity to some degree and succeeds wonderfully and is very healthful as somebody else — every once in a while. One doesn’t succeed anytime, though, to the degree that he should, because his yesterday will eventually catch up with him.

If you want to get a preclear into a complete, apathetic, slavish state — in other words, if you want to get him into the state of a psychiatric patient — all you have to do is demonstrate to him that it is his fault, continually demonstrate to him that this was his fault and that was his fault, until all of a sudden he ceases to want to be cause. Then get him to blame you and blame you very heavily. (This is, by the way, psychiatric practice.) Eventually, of course, if you can get him to blame you as the auditor and blame you and blame you, pretty soon you will really be cause. You can say, “Do a loop,” and he will loop. That is how you set it up.

Now, the manic-depressive, historically — as well as hysterically — falls off from a manic, saying, “Oh, boy! Oh, gee! Oh, boy! Oh, great, fine! Euphoria! Great! Great!”

If you want to really rule an organization, be so ornery and so mean and do so m any overt acts that there won ‘t be an in dividual in that organi z ati on but will blame you, and after that they do everything you say.

And you say, “What are you thinking about?”

How is a marine company run so well? The officers in the Marine Corps know all about this, evidently; they evidently found out about this somewhere under the walls of Tripoli’ or something. The officers don’t have anything much to do with the troops. They aren’t the cause of anything or the effect of anything, particularly; they sort of hold off. They are the people that give the sergeants hell once in a while, maybe. They set a good example in battle. It is the British Army and British Marine Corps philosophy from which that is borrowed.

“Oh, I don’t know. Well, we’re thinking these big thoughts and . . . big thoughts and . . .”

They get it all blamed on the sergeant. The sergeant takes all the blame. It is his fault, but it is also his blame. Everybody blames him actively and then they have a good, smooth-running company.

“What thoughts?”

Don’t think for a moment that that sergeant can come down along the line and go into ARC with all these enlisted men and have anything happen in that company. It won’t. Why? Because he is then not cause — they haven’t elected him cause.

“Well, we’re just thinking them. What are you questioning them for? You want to put me in a depressive cycle?”

Now, do you elect an individual cause by going around and voting? No — elected officers are rarely successful officers. Why? You have to blame yourself; you elected them, didn’t you? So what you really should do is elect a group to appoint an officer, and you would get results then.

That is the tune of it. He is not thinking. He is in an engram, actually — a simple, mechanical engram, just as mechanical as you read about in the first book. This engram has two points on its curve. Point one is way up at the top of the scale and the other point is way down at the bottom. That is an emotional curve.

For instance, the government of the United States would be far more fascistic if Congress were permitted to select, after Congress was elected, a president. We would have a government there that would really be operating with a meat chopper. Only we don’t want a government like that. Furthermore, we don’t want all the government we pay for.

So any time you run into this character, you are running into a very interesting setup which we get when we examine a facsimile.

So you open up a channel by which you will be an effect: you can expect that channel, as you roll along, to be an aberrative channel. This gives food, clothing, housing and, in particular, sex (because it has a communication channel that is tactile) terrific emphasis. What do you worry about all the time? Food, clothing, shelter and the second dynamic.

We take an individual who is at about 2.5 and we start operating on him; we put some gas to his nose or something of the sort and we start him down the line. And what do you know? He goes through a complete tone scale. He goes from 2.5 down to practically zero. There is the emotional curve. It is the middle of every engram.

The only reason you worry about them, the only reason they don’t happen almost automatically, is that you want to be an effect. So a person is made to work for his food. It is a very funny thing that nobody ever set it up s o a person had to work for his after- s have loti on or ski ing tri p to S un Val ley or other odds and ends, and gave him the food. That doesn’t quite work out. The employer has uniformly selected a channel where the individual is of necessity effect and he has used that for pay. Also, he gets obedience when he does this.

Every tone level below the level the preclear is chronically at is in every incident of unconsciousness. He may be starting into this thing at 1.1. This operation actually starts at the moment when he hears he is going to be operated on. He starts coming down the tone scale with the idea and then when he is actually starting to go unconscious he is probably down around fear. He will do a fluctuation into anger and then he will slide on down off anger into fear and down into grief and then into apathy. Then he will gradually climb up out of this on the same levels.

As a matter of fact there are a lot of lessons to be learned here. There are a lot of things that have been overlooked. There are lots of ways to crack a blacksnake whip over men, there are lots of ways to enslave them; there are lots of ways to un de rm ine person al ities and c haracter an d everyth ing el se in this. This is a real hot package! I think it would sell very, very quickly in Moscow or Washington. The package is hot. But it doesn’t get very hot if an auditor knows about it.

You do a cross section on any engram and you will find the emotional tone of that cross section. An engram is not a monotone: it is in a curve. You want to do a complete emotional curve on an engram; you get the emotion before, the depth emotion and the last emotion of recovery.

“Let’s scan everything and every time in your life when you postulated to yourself that you wanted to be an effect.” “Let’s scan every time you blamed anybody for doing something to you.” Let’s get those out of the line and the first thing you know, the individual starts up the tone scale. Why does he start up the tone scale? Because you are taking away all the times when he desired to be an effect.

By the way, that is a very interesting one and you mustn’t overlook it because it is relief. The fellow hears that it is all over now, so he is in a state of relief. You ask your preclear what he wants and he will very often tell you he wants relief. Where do you find relief? If you scan all the relief in the bank you will find him at the end of every accident and every operation just after it is over. And what kind of shape is he in? He is all bandaged up, he is sick at his stomach and so on; that is relief!

Now, when an individual desires to be an effect of his own memories, this is really royal! A person starts in saying, “Well, I’d like to cherish this memory. That was an awfully good show; I’d like to think about that later. I hope nobody spoils this illusion for me.” He has been an effect. He has been watching this beautiful picture or a dance or ballet or something of the sort and he says, “I want to cherish this memory, I want to keep this around.” All of a sudden he has assigned value to memory, value to a facsimile. That is the first crime.

You run an emotional curve, then, which goes down and up. You start running this emotional curve down and up, down and up, and you will actually start disconnecting engrams from this individual without running them. I will go into that in a moment.

Value the show, be damned! Go to it tomorrow night, go to it next week or go to other shows. The only moment you are alive is now. There isn’t any other moment.

What is a manic-depressive? A manic-depressive is an individual who, because of a phrase or an effort or a restimulation — no more and no less — climbs way up the tone scale; there is just a small peak, and he hits this peak and then dives off it again and goes on with the engram. That peak is very fragile. It has been observed many times that a person stays on the manic less and less and in the depressive more and more. That is because the emotional curve of failure does what? We are really talking about key-in, aren’t we? Now we have the answer to key-in.

When individuals pick up past memories and cherish them, the first thing you know, they find themselves cherishing material objects, and then they start wondering what all this burden of psychosomatic illness is. An auditor tries to get them to let go of this but down at the bottom is a terrific desire to be an effect.

A key-in is just a continual failure. The drop of emotion, which is natural to existence, can all of a sudden tie up with one of these engrams. And if a person gets enough of these emotional curves just in the analytical business of living, he will pick up more and more of these engrams until his whole bank looks like that curve.

You start going down the line and you say, “When did you want yourself to be influenced pleasantly by a memory?”

We are not ki cking out the window the first book or engra ms or sec ondaries. They are still there, but we have to know how to handle them a lot faster than we have ever known how to before. So let’s know their upper strata of anatomy. We find out in the first place that emotion is the thing which latches them on so that “I” can hold on to them. The “I” can hold on to them by emotion. We find out that when we get the emotion off we really start straightening things out.

The preclear sort of squirms for a minute and says, “How did you know?”

We find quite often that one of these engrams has got effort surrounding its emotion and that you really can’t get to its emotion at all because there is too much effort on it. All of a sudden effort seems to be indicated in running the thing. You run the effort for a moment and suddenly emotion and thoughts come out of it. That is when you use Effort Processing.

Freud was to some degree right. On the second dynamic, because of this tactile communication system, you have a complete setup. And then the society fixes up everybody by saying, “No, you’re not twenty-one yet and you have to get married.” So a person goes through all his teens desiring to be an effect, but every time he is it is illegal in some fashion or other. So he not only desires to be an effect but he has to hide the effect. Pretty soon he hides it from himself. And about the time he gets to be forty-five or fifty somebody says, “I wouldn’t go out with him.” He loses his potency because he has hidden it all! All the way down the line he has pushed it back. He desired to be an effect and then he said, “No, I’ve got to hide this because if people found out the horrible things that I did, why, I would be ruined socially. So therefore I have to hide all this wanting to be an effect.”

But as soon as e motion starts to show up after using Effort Pro cess ing , why go on using effort? What you do at that point is start running emotional curves, and the darned incident will disconnect. Because what holds it to the case? Effort doesn’t hold it to the case. Effort is just effort: You get in your car, you slam the door, you put on the brakes — effort, effort, effort, miscalculation. You start to open a drawer and you have to yank and bang at it. You mean to tell me this is aberrative? No, it is not. This is just incident to living in a rather patched-up society which doesn’t make drawers and doors so they handle easily.

He is thirty-two years old and he goes to a motion picture. It shows the Rockettes or something of the sort and they are doing a beautiful dance, and he is sitting there and the plot runs off in front of his face. A couple of teenagers down the line seem to be getting a big bang out of this movie but he doesn’t seem to be able to. Then he goes outside and he looks and there is green grass and blue sky, and a couple down the line seem to think that that is very nice but for some reason or other it doesn’t look very nice to him anymore. And he all of a sudden realizes that the world is not pleasant to him, that he does not any longer experience pleasure. So then he cooks up a big dream of how he is really going to make sure that Mary and the kids are secure or something and nobly goes on his way.

But that effort can remind an individual who is already well down the tone scale that he has been balked before. And the emotion which he starts to exhibit can all of a sudden start to tie on to some old engram, and there he goes. What is happening to him?

What he has actually done is he has desired to be an effect, hidden it, put it back, got up a lot of blame and then, out of fear of shame (which is what guilt is; it is down between 0.9 and 0.6), he has just hidden all this. He hides it from himself. His memories become dangerous. He does not dare exhibit his memories so he starts telling people, “Well, I forget. I don’t know her name. I don’t know where that was.” He knows he is dodging something but he can’t figure out quite what he is dodging. The facsimiles are really handling him.

Doing an analysis of this, we find something very, very simple is happening to him: He is failing to handle his own facsimiles, and that is all that is happening to him. He is not handling his own facsimiles.

You should understand this point very clearly: There is a great world of difference between looking at present-time reality and looking at the memory of present-time reality. That is why we are calling them facsimiles, because they are facsimiles: you make a box top that looks just more or less like it and send it in and you get your spoon. It is not the real thing. And handling it is handling a memory; it is not handling a concrete past. It is like handling a motion-picture reel or something of the sort; it is not handling a past.

That is all that can happen to an individual, evidently: his own facsimiles go out of his control. So our study is how to put these facsimiles back into his control or how to disconnect them so he can’t handle them — so they just fly off someplace and that is the end of them. And in a lowtonescale case that is what you do: you just throw these facsimiles out. He would try to reach out and he would be reaching for thin air — that’s a big joke on him.

You can go back down the time track and find the time you were in San Francisco or Dallas or someplace. You can remember that right this minute — when you were at some other place. Now, right here in present time, think how far away that was: not in time; think in miles — distance. Just get a concept of these towns being well over the horizon. They are a long way away. That is reality.

Then you pick him up along the line and you get him up to a point where he can do anything he wants with them. That is the state you are trying to get him into. That is self-determinism. Selfdeterminism includes the handling of one’s own memories. If one cannot handle one’s own memories, then the environment can handle them for him and that is restimulation.

But an individual who is building up a “hide,” building up a shame, getting all loused up with wanting to be an effect this way, that way, other ways and so forth, eventually starts to hide his own memories. And then all of a sudden he says, “I’m hiding these things; therefore they must be dangerous. You know, they must be awfully dangerous — I have to work so hard to hide them.” And then he either gets to you or they get him.

It is pretty low on the tone scale, this restimulation of the engram. It only happens to individuals who are being very thoroughly handled by their environment. Think about that for a minute.

But there is a whole sphere of aberrative operation contained in this: a person’s desire to be a cause, his efforts to keep from being an enforced cause — ”you’re to blame” — and his efforts to keep from having cause in-~ hibited in him.

You start working on self-determinism and you will get your preclear going on up the tone scale at a heck of a rush. He will get up to a point where he can really handle these things and do anything he wants with them. This means you will have him up to a point where a silly tune won’t get into his head and start going round and round and round. That is just a facsimile he is not handling. He wanted to be affected by the tune, so he is being affected by it. He doesn’t know how to keep himself from being affected by it, so he can’t lay it aside when he wants to.

What happens here? A couple doesn’t want children. That is sex: desired cause of children. The first thing you know, it isn’t any fun anymore. They don’t want to be cause, so they come down the tone scale. The second they don’t want to be cause they start down the tone scale and there goes the old shell game.

Most minds would be some file clerk sitting in an enormous central filing system, and this file clerk has been told that he is in charge of all these files: There he sits and the file drawers slide open and packages start flying out of them. The whole file on the subject of automobiles moves over one day and somebody drops a steel curtain in between him and it. It is over there someplace, but he can’t tell you much about automobiles. He finally gets so he is just in a state of apathy.

Now, we take somebody around grief: You talk to them crossly, roughly or something of the sort and you tell them they have got to straighten up, and all of a sudden they begin to cry, quite unexpectedly. You say, “Oh, gee, I was too rough.” You didn’t want to be a cause. You didn’t want to be a cause of their tears, so you go into sympathy.

The file clerk stops working when a fellow goes way down the tone scale. It just sits there in apathy; the packages fly this way and they go that way, lines get connected this way and that way and the files get scrambled; a wind blows in through the window and it mixes them all up. He says, “Well, I guess that’s just the way things are. The environment is handling me.” That is the state an individual gets into.

Actually, most of the things that anybody has ever been mad about in this world don’t amount to anything. You go back over the things you have been mad about in the past and if you really take a look at them they look pretty silly to you. They are generally an effort to enforce cause elsewhere. That is really what anger is.

How do you put him back into a better state? Do you have to pick up every file, dust it off, find the proper filing place and put it back in place? God help us if we had to do that. That was actually, to some degree, what we were trying to do not too long ago. It is much too long a job and I hate filing anyway. Let’s just fix up the file clerk so he can go to work and do it anyhow. Let’s put personnel on the job. Let’s get the preclear into a situation where he can handle all of these things and then cut him loose.

Grief is “I’m not cause. Look what you’ve done to me. You’ve ruined me.” That is grief.

You will find that when you get him into a place where he can handle all of these things, he starts a rather progressive advance right on up the tone scale. He will walk along through life and he will see something and it will remind him of something else and that will remind him of something else. He will say, “What the — why was I ever worried about palm trees? Oh, yes! Yes,” and that’s that — boom! — it is gone, and he isn’t even thinking about it.

Apathy is “Well, here I lie — you can’t think I caused anything, can you? I’m innocent. Look at me. I’m innocent.”

One day he will get so doggone extroverted and so intense on this new project that when you say, “Well, did you get it all straightened out?” he says, “Did I get all what straightened out?” “Don’t you remember? Auditing.”

But real cause way up at the top gets confused by a 1.5 with 1.5 enforced cause. So a fellow who is causing something encounters a 1.5 and the 1.5 says, “He’s trying to force cause on me because he’s trying to cause something. Therefore it’s causing; therefore the only thing I can possibly do about the thing is stop it! So therefore I’ll stop all cause that I see around and I will pretend that I am cause. I won’t do anything to be cause, but I’ll pretend I’m cause and I’ll tell everybody how much time I have to put in being cause all the time. But I won’t do anything, so I won’t have to be cause. And then I’ll show them that they’re cause and then I’ll get sympathy.” At 1.5 a fellow really wants sympathy and approval. He is really trying to take out a license from you to survive.

“Oh, yes, yes. Yes sir, that was a good session. That was a good session. Best thing that ever happened to me. Thanks ever so much. Say, by the way, would you like to buy a block of stock in . . . ?” He comes up above the level, eventually, where he thinks he has to buy any license to survive.

If you ever doubt this, get somebody who is terrifically angry at you sometime and just question him about what approval you can show him. He will break down and do a complete explanation. A person at 1.5 is applying for a license to survive; he is applying for it by making himself horrible to have around.

Now, you might think offhand the society would probably fly completely to pieces and everybody would stop cooperating with everybody else and it would be entirely chaotic if everybody became completely, fully responsible and off on their own concerns. Maybe it would! But apparently, from what small indications we have, it doesn’t. It just starts to work a lot smoother and individuals in it become a lot healthier.

At 0.5 the person is making himself completely innocuous, innocent, enervated — ”I’m just a poor little thing; you wouldn’t refuse me a license, would you?”

The main goal, then, has to do with the facsimile, and we could classify this as “facsimile, handling of.” Your knowledge which is under that heading should be classified as very important. Anything that comes under that classification is more important than “facsimile, erasing of” or “facsimile, reduction of.” Much more important is “handling of” — by the preclear himself.

There is the gradient scale of cause. If you want to know where an individual is on the tone scale, see how much he is willing to cause. But then look at the quality of what he is willing to cause.

You have to know how to handle people’s facsimiles before they can handle them. The preclear isn’t handling his and you as an auditor are the environment, so you have to know how to handle his facsimiles.

Now, on the effect line, an individual can safely be an effect on any channel he wants to be an effect on — he is completely safe in being an effect — as long as he doesn’t negate being a cause on any channel. Because if he desires to be an effect everything is all fine, but if all of a sudden he negates being a cause he is prime to suddenly become an effect — and he will get it.

By the way, you could probably process a person by processing him on all the people he was trying to process while he was busy growing up. “What would you like to have reformed in so-and-so?”

This is the same as the individual you sit down and tell to sit quietly and concentrate on nothingness. He then is an effect; you are making an effect out of him, and the more of an effect he is, the more counter-efforts he will continue to get.

Now, in the handling of a facsimile, first you have to realize what a facsimile is. It is a recording through all perceptions of the environment plus a recording of the thought, evaluation and conclusion — considering that a person himself is part of his own environment. That is a facsimile. It is a motion picture, a smellie, everything, across the boards — a wonderful motion picture in technicolor and so forth. This would be a full facsimile. This is data.

There are individuals who are sort of plowing through life and they have wanted to be an effect on many things and they don’t want to cause very much. They won’t eat much and so forth; they are kind of just maundering through life gradually, slowly, carrying along. They aren’t a cause, they aren’t an effect, but they sure are close to going out the bottom and they sure give you as an auditor a lot of trouble. One of the reasons they give you trouble is they are not going to be an effect on what you say either, because that is the last ditch.

Once upon a time we were overstressing the need of sonic and visio and all the rest of this stuff. I don’t know that a person at 20.0 has any sonic and visio. I can tell you this: A person at 1.1 who has a tremendous amount of regret has a complete sonic dub-in track. I can tell you that, certainly, and I can tell you that if you take somebody at around 4.0 who is carrying forward a life continuum for somebody else, you will find he can shut off his sonic and visio and you can turn them back on again. But I don’t know that you could persuade anybody at 20.0 — though the facsimiles might be there, complete — to look at them. So this would be the same thing as saying they aren’t there, because you are never going to look at them. It comes out to that old cockeyed argument: Would there be a sound if a tree fell in a forest and a man wasn’t there? I have already brought an individual up above the level where he stops doing anything with sonic and visio; he is getting instantaneous computational data.

You find such people going around worrying about things; they have to concentrate awfully hard on being right if they are going to be alive at all. They correct you when you use an improper word. They leave an idea to go sidetracking over to make sure that the words are all right and so on. They do all sorts of interesting things. They are an effect, but they are so close to being a real, unlive effect (how much of an effect can a person be? Dead!) that when you try to affect them with something and you use a little bit too much horsepower on the thing, you will drive them right out through the bottom.

So handling a facsimile also includes what you select out of the facsimile and how you read facsimiles. I would like to see somebody do a paper on that; I don’t know yet. But I do know this: You can select any part of a facsimile you want if you are really self-determined. You can select out its effort, you can select out its emotion, you can select out its thought patterns, you can select out its perceptics. Any of these things could be selected out of it.

But if you start using powderpuff techniques they can throw you out, for the good reason that they don’t want to be any more of an effect. You, asking them to do something, are asking them to be more of an effect. This is a weird one. How do you get to it? How do you solve it?

But I don’t know that a person at 20.0 has any truck whatsoever with recalls as such. I am giving that to you bluntly; maybe I am up above the point where I rationalize. But there is a point for you: If you are trying to rehabilitate somebody’s sonic and visio as your goal in auditing, you evidently are going to keep him down along the line someplace where he does this. It is no goal. It isn’t worth it. This fellow is going to know everything there is to know, when he really gets up there, without recalling it laboriously, because recalls are not done in time. There is no time in a facsimile. There is a time tab and it says “August 3, 1942, 2:01 A.M.,” but he doesn’t even read that at this high level. He just happens to know that that is the datum.

They usually got that way because there was a lot of stuff on cause and effect. There have been a lot of people around them telling them that they were cause, “and cause is important, it’s serious.” This is blame — ”You see what you caused now! This is serious. You ought to know better than to do such a thing. You’re to blame!” and so on.

If you ask him “What time did this happen?” he would probably tell you if he weren’t too interested in something else. Don’t think that a person who has been rehabilitated is even going to be necessarily polite.

Actually the button behind these buttons is the seriousness with which the charge of cause is leveled at individuals. If you want to start repairing this individual, you pick up about the lightest button you can find on the case. It will be one of those buttons on our chart, and it most likely will be a “serious” button of some sort. You can’t run anything very heavy on these people. When they are way down on the tone scale, you can even get them to work a lock and the lock won’t blow; it is just too heavy for them.

Now, a unit facsimile would be any consecutive related experience, in motion and so forth. Actually, it would contain as many recordings or as many separate pictures as sight needs in order to produce motion — 75 to 125 pictures a second. But maybe this experience lasted for a week. Maybe somebody got married and at the end of the week got divorced. Maybe somebody had an automobile accident; maybe somebody gave him a piece of cake. Each one of these things would be a unit facsimile. It would be a related experience. So you can see how variable its definition could be, but nevertheless it is only variable in terms of subject and time.

In processing they can’t be an effect, and yet they won’t cause themselves to climb up the tone scale and get well. That is why these cases give you trouble. So what do you do? Actually there is something you can do: You can just follow the general steps leading into the solution of insanity — mimicry and so forth. You can get them in. They are willing to mimic you because you are obviously alive. Then you can find out who they are being insane for on a life continuum.

Related subject: “When I was in college . . .” Theoretically, lying there is a four-year or sixyear unit facsimile; this is the first one he presents. “. . . I was living in the south dorm.” That cuts it down to a much smaller facsimile. “And I had a roommate, and one night” (this is getting much shorter) “we went to see this girl.” This is a little tiny facsimile we are talking about now. That is the way things get introduced: big block, then smaller, smaller, smaller, smaller, and then the facsimile he wants to talk about.

And by the way, practically every insane person is busily being insane for somebody else, not for themselves. The nobility of the human race! They lie there and let prefrontal lobotomies be performed on them, they let electric shocks happen to them, they let themselves be shot with sodium pentothall — they even let psychiatrists talk to them! In other words, they will go through anything to hang on to somebody else’s goal to be insane. That is very fascinating.

Now, the person who is being handled by the environment says, “When I was in college — I forget which year it was — I had a roommate whose name was . . . Well, anyway, one night . . . What was I talking about?” This person is not handling his facsimiles. You want to get him up to where he handles them easily, swiftly and well. The only point that you will be able to get him to is the point where he becomes self-determined about handling them, and he is then going to fly out of your hands. Then you say, “Well, that’s the end of that preclear.” That is what will happen. You are not going to put anybody up at 20.0. You might put somebody at

There may be a faster way of hitting the case, but in Handbook for Preclears there is a list of the exact steps you take to bring a psychotic out of it. What you hit after that is probably a life continuum, and the case should blow very quickly.

3.5 or 4.0, but he will go on up if he is going to go. And if he isn’t going to go and you can’t put him any further anyhow, so what? There are lots of preclears!

I want to give you the source on cause and effect: The basic concept on cause and effect is Persian. I first learned of it out of a manuscript which was published about A.D. 850. It talks about the role of a practitioner of the Magi. He is supposed to cause things and it warns him not to be affected by them. That is all it says. I ran into that thing head-on and I scratched my head over it for some time and tried to figure it out. I figured there was something more there and more than they knew they were writing. I coasted along for quite a while before I finally got it disentangled.

You get him up above this band of 2.0 and he is not going to murder anybody, he is not going to kill himself, he is not going to work active harm in the society, he is not going to buy the crime of omission — which we very often forget is a crime.

Now, processing the life continuum is actually Postulate Processing. Postulates cause life continuum; it is the variety in which they are made and the difficulty of getting to them that gives trouble.

Have you ever run into anybody who says “But I didn’t say anything, I didn’t have any part in the argument; it wasn’t any fault of mine”? Oh, yeah? That is the crime of omission. It is the failure to talk when they should have talked; it is the failure to do when they should have done.

An individual says, “I’m going to try to help, and I want him to be well, and I want him to be happy,” and then all of a sudden that other person is dead. The individual has then had his own postulates torn up and thrown in his face. He said, “I’m going to do something,” and then something prevented it from happening; something caused death. So he says, “I must have done it because I said I was going to do otherwise, and I must be to blame because I said I was going to help and I didn’t. My postulate is wrong, so therefore I’m wrong, so therefore I must be to blame on this death.”

Commission — action — looks so much bigger. That is pretty bad. Omission is worse, by the way, than the other level.

This is true along any line of postulates. Postulates lie behind this sort of thing. An individual makes a postulate of one sort or another and it follows on out.

These people, when you bring them up the tone scale, won’t drive others around them berserk by their inactivity, irresponsibility, letting things slide by the boards and being completely limp about this and that and so forth. And they aren’t going to smash things and upset things and change everything haywire so people are upset all the time. In other words, they aren’t going to destroy things.

The trick in processing the life continuum is in how you dig up these postulates, because that was such a terrible failure that to get this death undone and get some of the somatic off it and get it squared around and get back to the actual postulate really requires a little bit of doing. Once one understands, however, the mechanics of the emotional curve and running a little bit of effort and so on, these postulates will fall out. It is when you get the earliest postulates off the thing that the case starts falling apart in an awful hurry. Postulates are very, very important!

But when you get them up above this 2.0 level, people start acting in a self-determined fashion. When they get up around 4.0 you can usually still reach them; maybe you can reach somebody at 5.0 and maybe you could push somebody up to 6.0, but by that time they are out of your hands. This is very different from somebody going out of your hands because of inaccessibility below 2.0. Don’t ever make the mistake of confusing these two.

Cause and effect is very much to the point in this. A woman says to herself one New Year’s Eve, “I’m not going to smoke anymore, I’m going to be nice to my husband, I’m not going to burn any more steaks, I’m not going to talk about Mrs. Wompatattle anymore and I’m going to be nice to the children. Now, there, I’ve done my New Year’s Day duty.” She writes them all down and breaks them all on the second day of January and goes into a decline and is hell to live with the rest of the year.

There is one nice test: Is he thinking? Can he think about things? And does he remember things well? The only reason a person forgets is that he doesn’t want to remember. The only reason he doesn’t want to remember is that it hurts him to remember. If it hurts him to remember, then he can’t handle his facsimiles. So you just want to get him up to a point where he can handle all of his facsimiles, and that is all you are trying to do with the preclear. Of course, he won’t have any chronic somatics at that point. He could move in and out of a heart attack for an armyinduction physical in a split instant. He would go in and see the doctor, and he would have his heart going “B-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r-r! Murmur, murmur, murmur.”

Why? Because postulates were made which had to be altered but weren’t altered, so the individual was going up against these postulates with a solid crunch. After she had made this postulate, every time she smoked she was calling herself a liar, because she was going up against the postulate.

The doctor would say, “Oh, for God’s sake! I mean. . . It’s all right. Sorry, son,” and write down, “Poor fellow, he hasn’t got long to live. Rejected .”

It works out this way: On Tuesday you say “I’m never going to have anything to do with Annabelle anymore — never!” and on Wednesday you go over to her house. That is a failure. It is a failure to you with you because you said so-and-so and then you made a liar out of yourself, so you failed.

Then the fellow would go outside and his heart would go pocketapocketa-pocketa-pocketapocketa- pocketa — regular as a clock.

What happens is that an individual cannot make a single postulate without becoming the effect of that postulate, because an individual is riding in a time continuum. He can’t say “I am going to be a so-and-so” without moving on forward in time to a position where he is supposed to be the so-and-so. And he becomes a so-and-so even in his own eyes.

Now, don’t get off into the feeling that because a person “wasn’t there when it happened” he didn’t know about it. Because you and I know he did. He can pick up both ends of an engram; they are both known. They are a space in time, aren’t they? And if he has that space in time spaced, he knows the content in between those points must have been space too; he can even handle an engram, and don’t think he can’t.

Cause and effect: A postulate is a cause, and the second the individual moves away from that point in time he becomes the effect of this postulate. S o an in dividual is be ing continu ally an effect of his past whether he likes it or not. He is continually an effect of his past unless he gets swiveled completely out of valence or something of the sort, or unless he starts life over again or decides to be suddenly all over again. As a matter of fact, you could decide that and just drop all the past facsimiles and everything else and let them all go by the boards. You would have a fine case of amnesia, but you would be very happy! Every once in a while somebody does this; he just swivels completely out of valence and he is no longer subject to his own postulates. He says, “I’m somebody else. Now I am somebody else.” People who change their names effect this to some degree.

You can go back along a preclear’s track and ask him, “All right, now, you’ve got this ear somatic. When did you first decide to have it?”

This is why postulates are so important — because of cause and effect. A postulate is cause, a conclusion actually can become a cause, an evaluation can become a cause, and the individual moving along on his own time continuum then becomes the effect of this cause. You should be very chary of making promises. You say, “All right, next Tuesday I will...” but you probably won’t be there. So just before you say “Next Tuesday I will . . .” make sure you say “(You know when I promise people things I never mean it.) Next Tuesday I will. . .” And you will be able to go through all next Tuesday without keeping any appointment or doing anything and feel perfectly at ease and go to bed that night with no conscience whatsoever.

“Never! I never decided to have it.”

What is conscience? It is simply negating against your own — not somebody else’s — causes. If there is such a thing as conscience, it would be that. You have said on Tuesday, “All right, I will be a good boy, I won’t do it anymore. I won’t do it anymore, I’ll be a good boy” — not under duress or anything like that!

“Oh, well, think for a moment. What is the value of having this ear somatic?”

Then, come Wednesday, you are walking home from school and everything looks fine to you, particularly those apples. So you shin over the fence and you climb the apple tree to get a whole bunch of apples and you put them in your shirt and you get back on the road again. You start walking along and then for some reason or other you feel guilty. You know nobody is going to come and take you off to jail — not for stealing some apples — and you try to figure this out. “What’s wrong? Is it because I’m afraid of somebody catching me or something?” You consult everything but your own postulates; you consult everything else. And so you finally get the weird ideas “I am afraid of police. I’m afraid Papa and Mama will punish me. I’m afraid I will be deserted by the whole society and left to die upon these arid plains of the Bronx” — anything but the fact that “-last Tuesday I said I would be a good boy, and now I’m not being a good boy.”

“Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. There’s something there....”

You are your own judge and, believe me, all too often you are your own executioner. Fascinating, isn’t it?

“Well, do you remember what it is?” “No, but I just got a vague idea . . .”

Now, if you can remember sometime in your life when you felt guilty of something, you can go back earlier and find the postulate that you are guilty of disobeying. There is really only one person you are going to disobey and that is you. You are the only person it is serious to disobey, and that is only serious until you get up the “serious” button. After that you say, “Well, let’s see, next Tuesday I’m going to be the Sultan of Siam,” and next Tuesday instead you are a hobo — so what?

“Well, run some sympathy for a minute.”

I have heard individuals say, “You know, I have to take the rest of life unseriously and I take only myself seriously.” There it goes, from the first dynamic out. You might think that this is the sort of thing that obtains on every hand — it does. But the only reason you take yourself seriously is that so many other people have. This is a beautiful operation: You make a person make a postulate, then you make them make the postulate again and make it again, and then all of a sudden you find them disobeying their own postulate. Then you say, “Hm-hm. You yourself said . . .” “Now, you promised Mama that . . .” That is the way it works. So these things start to look serious to you.

So he scans some sympathy — “Oh, yes, it’s my aunt. Ha-ha! She sure used to get upset when I got an earache.”

Also, remember that every time in your life that you got hurt, you made the decision which got you hurt. Therefore you are liable to start taking your own decisions seriously, particularly if you agreed sometime or another that Mama hurt or that hurting was bad or if you are taking part in a life continuum for someone who believed that pain was horrible.

“Well, do you remember turning it on?”

The actual truth of the matter is you could probably stand up to anything as far as pain is concerned. I would bet that a Chinese torturer couldn’t make much of an effect on an individual unless he was severely aberrated on the subject of how much pain should hurt and how important pain was.

“No. I didn’t turn it on automatically at first.”

You know where this comes from? This comes from the one-life theory. This theory was arrived at without any scientific conclusion and without much thought. It was probably postulated sometime in the past in an effort to control individuals and to impress little children into the fact that they had to behave and do what they should do, because you would have an awful time trying to control people who believed they would have another chance. So you get them to make the postulate when they are still tottering around and tripping over their triangular pants that they only live once and that life is serious and it is important. Then you can lay a lot of regret into the life too. A person is swinging along, getting along fine and all of a sudden it occurs to him when he is twenty-two that he will never again be twenty-one. He gets married and he says, “I’ll never again be free. I’ll never again be able to take out four girlfriends in the same night.”

“Well, what did happen?”

Life is sown with these horrible regrets. An individual begins at last to look back to the times when he should have but he didn’t, and does he regret that! Because he has been taught that “you only live once and you’ll never have another chance.”

“Oh, I remember I put a bean in my ear and it swelled up and she was very sympathetic. We went down to the doctor’s and he got it out. By golly, do you know after that every once in a while I’d get this earache when I was around her. Yeah. She’d blow cigarette smoke in it. Yeah. She’s dead now. I wonder if that’s why I smoke cigarettes?” The other thing just sort of drops out.

This also makes a person very brave on the battlefield. It is really horrendous that this boy goes out and lays down his life. That is great stuff; you can play it up very strongly. The whole truth of the matter is, it was very, very fine of the boy to go ahead and do what he thought he ought to do. But he did it! He had full responsibility when he did. The only reason that this could be considered very bad is if one were holding on to a one-life theory. Then it becomes horrible; it becomes strictly nightmare stuff! Little children start dreaming about coffins and this and that; people all around them are telling them “You’ve only got one life to live!” and the child is trying to fight himself out of this one way or the other.

Now, obviously some unconsciousness or something could be around such an incident, and the computation is on it.

I would have had a very easy mind during the last war. I used to get pretty wrought up on two counts: my own life was skidding by ineffectively and my own work was not being performed, and on the other hand the lives and energies of a great many men were being wasted. I still protest their being wasted, because it is an ignoble waste! That is real waste.

When a person goes unconscious down along the lower band he is in bad shape, because he is not conscious to begin with to amount to anything. But this isn’t any reason why he can’t say “Well, the years from five to ten I wasn’t very conscious.” That handles that facsimile.

But if you really want to hang it up as something just utterly gruesome, convince a man that he has only got one life and then take it away from him.

A person can handle his facsimiles with thought, he can handle them with emotion and he can handle them in lots of ways. But he knows what he is doing. And although you may act as though you are fully responsible, if you go on caring what he does with a facsimile after you have got him up to a point where he can really handle this facsimile, you are not being fully responsible at all. You are way down scale on the thing; you are being very concerned.

What we will do for randomity in this society!

The fellow you should be concerned with is the fellow who cannot handle his facsimiles: he has a bad memory, he doesn’t remember, he has slow reactions, it takes him a long time to think, he hasn’t got any time to do anything (although he is playing solitaire). This is a rough case! Serious! He says, “Well, I’ve put all that way back; I don’t think about that anymore.” It is way back, all right.

Don’t get me wrong. Any part of any life laid down for a cause is a very worthwhile proposition. It is real sacrifice; there is no doubt about that. But don’t rub it in!

All this depends on is a point of self-confidence. Perhaps this individual, by taking up the piano or by indulging in group therapy or some other thing, comes up fast enough so all of a sudden he starts to handle a few of his facsimiles. There you go — something has been done therapeutically. It doesn’t matter how you get this individual to handle his facsimiles; that is what we want him to do. At first he doesn’t want to handle them, in almost every case you lay your hands on, and you just sort of have to hornswoggle him into it. And all of a sudden he says to you very cockily one day, “Oh, well, I can remember that. I got myself started in. I always remembered that,” and he is going to town, because he is now going to be selfdetermined about the whole thing. That is what you are doing to people.

I don’t care whether you pick up this other theory or not. Just remember that you have thoroughly agreed and have had it postulated into you, “of your own free will, out of a vast amount of phenomena which has been examined thoroughly by experts all through the ages and found to be utterly and completely true and without any slightest contradiction,” that you only live one life!

This point of view is possible at this time because of the knowledge of Postulate Processing, the knowledge of Effort Processing and the knowledge of emotional curves. It is a faster and more advanced viewpoint than any of the past viewpoints we have had in Dianetics.

One of the horrible things you can do is just show that the evidence doesn’t exist on the other side and then show people that you have something. And as long as it stays a reasonable society, a society which always will agree with you when you show them the phenomena, we are safe!

It is very distrustful of an individual to think that you have to knock out every bad memory he has. This is really saying to him “Well, we have to fix you up, you poor guy; you can’t handle your facsimiles anyhow; we just have to fix you up so no matter how you handle them you can’t get into trouble.” We didn’t have other ways to go about it. But now we have these other techniques; now we can start handling it on a faster basis. That is why processing has gotten swifter. It is just that there has been this shift of emphasis from fixing it up so that no matter what he did with his facsimiles he couldn’t get into trouble, to the point of fixing him up so he can handle his facsimiles no matter what happens. It takes the seriousness off the situation and the level of concern which you will feel. Therefore your technique is shorter and that is why it is shorter.

Therefore, a whole new process here really opens up to your eyes when you look at cause and effect. You have seen it in Advanced Procedure. An individual throws himself wide open to be an effect and after that can really be an effect. But this is perfectly all right. In order for him to be an effect — affected pleasurably or by pleasure — he also has to be willing to be a cause.

Now, the unit facsimile is something that can afford a great deal of study to a lot of people for an awful long time. You suddenly run head-on into the genetic blueprint of the body or its structural blueprint or any other blueprint that you want to call it, and when you start looking over this genetic blueprint you find out what its patterns of memory were that caused it to be constructed that way.

An individual who goes through life only wanting to be an effect is a sick person. I would bet that you have an acquaintance or a preclear who, if you kind of looked at them and took a real quick glance at them right this instant, is going through life being nothing but an effect, and who is bound and determined to be nothing but an effect. They sometimes will justify it by wanting to be an effect of pleasure — they want to enjoy life and so forth, they say. They don’t want to cause enjoyment in life: they want to enjoy life.

This would be, by the way, a major discovery in biology. If you want to play with this, you will be “biologizing” above any biologist alive today. Also, it tells you about evolution. There is a lot of data in there. But this is the data of what is in the facsimile, rather than “can he handle it?”

Now, all of the ramifications which come off this are very obvious. You really need no more than this.

A person’s self-determinism can be advanced up to a point, evidently, where he can handle any facsimile back along the time track. He doesn’t have to even remember and recognize the thing; he can handle it. So when it starts to move in on him he knows exactly why it started to move on him, he does an automatic process and it moves out — bang! — if he doesn’t want it.

But if you started “biologizing” you would want to know, wouldn’t you? You would want to know what was in this one, what was in that one, what was in another one, what was in another one; you would want to monkey around and fool around with them and examine them one way or the other. That is a very fascinating study.

You can examine some history with this track too. It doesn’t always agree with the history books. A “Mississippi of lies” is how one philosopher referred to history. I have gotten enough checks off the line to realize that it is not all squirrel-cage stuff.

There is good reason you run into past bad incidents of that character: there is so much regret on them. For some reason or other, people do not like to have a bottom-static failure. There is something about dying. (That poor clam ! )

Anyway, in all of this processing, if you have the return of self determined ability to handle facsimiles as an end goal, you will be able to do a lot faster work with your preclear.

Now, you say, “It takes several hours to run one grief charge off a case.” But are you saying “It takes me as the auditor several hours to run grief off of this preclear”?

It could be in three ways: We have this preclear up to a point where the running of the grief is incidental; we have this preclear up to the point where he will run his own grief; or he is still slogging down along the bottom of the tone scale someplace where you have to sit there and say, “Yes, yes. Yes, yes. And then what did she say? And then what did he say? What did she say then? Who else was there? Yes; yes, indeed....” You could take hours at that; I guarantee that you can spend over an hour running a grief charge off a case that way.

But if you start sneaking up on a grief charge by running regret and blame and an emotional curve and so forth, all of a sudden it is like an artillery shell exploding. If you run this stuff long enough, the preclear will blow up, or he will simply come into a recognition of the whole thing, snap out of it and pass right on over it, and he will no longer be stuck there on the track and he will be able to handle this facsimile.

It doesn’t much matter, because a facsimile is not interior; it is not inside you. It isn’t stored in any file-card system in the back of your head. It is not energy enclosed in your cells. It doesn’t have to be bled out of the cells in order to make the cells happier. I had done insufficient work on this; it apparently was in the cells, but that was before we isolated the identity of the life static and found out a facsimile didn’t have any wavelength. I would like to know how the devil you can store anything which doesn’t have any wavelength.

Furthermore, how rough can a facsimile get? I have a hole in my jaw that says it can get rough enough to kick a tooth out through the side — just a facsimile that you borrow and turn on full. Some of the people around the Foundation remember the night I came down looking rather hangdog and announced this experiment. It actually had broken a tooth out sideways. I would like you to show me a tooth which has residual energy in it sufficient to break it out from the center that way.

Completely aside from this point, all the cells of the body seem to change about every seven years. Completely aside from this point, remember the clam? You can’t tell me that the pain from that clam cell is still stored with physical-universe energy. It is not.

So you are handling facsimiles which are capable of regenerating on the physical universe and taking out of the physical universe the power they use. It is a regeneration process by which the facsimile uses the force residual in the universe in order to produce the forces which it has. But it can come in from the doggonedest vector sources.

Did you ever stand in a vaccination line? Sometimes the medical corpsmen or the hospital boys are not too easy on that; they stab the fellow and he goes spang! It is quite a jolt.

You can run a fellow through that; you can sit there and watch his arm if he is running well and you will see it dent where the needle hit. You will see it dent all the way in. Does anybody want to show me the muscles of the arm which can make it cave in to a point? That is nothing but fatty tissue that is caving in. Evidently the unit facsimile influences the atoms and molecules of physical structure. It is on that low a level of influence — at least that low a level of influence. It is a direct contact on atoms and molecules and it can form them into any shape it wants.

It is no mystery how your preclear can go way back down the bank and get into an incident in childhood and more or less get stuck there and keep on looking like that when you bring him up to present time. It is no mystery how you can have somebody with a big swelling on his neck and when you run the incident you can watch the swelling go down. It is no mystery; there is nothing much to it. That is a facsimile. What you are trying to do is handle these darn things.

The reason why the facsimile cannot be handled is not because the individual did not handle it at the time. That is much too brief. It is because he later on used it and failed with it. That is the key-in situation. It doesn’t matter how many Mack trucks you get run over by. Don’t, however, take a Mack truck and run over somebody and fail.

It is the use of the facsimile. You could actually ask a preclear this question and you would get an interesting result: “What is the first time you decided to use a bad facsimile or a destructive facsimile? What is the first time you decided to use it?” Try it. You may get some very interesting results out of your preclear, because that is basic-basicl on key-ins. I know what it is, but why don’t you find out? It is very easy to locate — the first time you decided to use a bad one.

Now, you decided to use a bad one in this life — the time your brother came up to you and said some nasty words and you hauled off and pasted him one. How come you pasted your brother one? What did you use for data to paste your brother one? You used an entheta facsimile. You pasted him one and Mama came out and said, “You mustn’t hit your brother anymore!” Bang! Bang! Bang! That hangs you up with this facsimile of pasting somebody in the jaw, and you can’t do anything about it, and so you have it. You went down an emotional curve; you went down to slow speed because you were interrupted in your action. And you get that facsimile from there on, because what did you use in the first place? You used the facsimile of being, yourself, struck in the jaw. You said, “This is data.” It was parked back there and you could handle that all right. So you were hit in the jaw — so what? But one day you said, “Hmm. I’m not fully responsible. Here’s a nice facsimile of a good sock in the jaw” — bang! You were being the countereffort; you were the winning valence at this point. You used that facsimile in the winning valence. You were being the counter-effort, you hit your brother in the jaw and then somebody came along and said, “No!” Down the tone scale you went. Then you had to swivel and be the effort — not the countereffort — so you got the sock in the jaw.

Why did somebody stop you? Because they wanted you socked in the jaw. People do this instinctively.

So when you drop an individual down the tone scale, you get him down below speed. It is even more exact than that: you throw him over to where he becomes the recipient of the counter-effort.

This individual has worked and worked and worked in order to get his preclear up from an engram. A little bit later somebody comes along and tells him he failed at it, or the preclear tells him he failed at it.

What has he been using for data? While he was working on the preclear, he may have been fool enough to pick up a facsimile out of his own bank that was almost identical to what had happened to his preclear. He had this and he was examining it: “It goes this way — goes round and round, and it comes out there. Oh, yes. What’s the next step? Yes. And then what happens? (That’s what happened to me.) Well, will that do?” He was all set. But what was he being? He was being the counter-effort. He was forcing the preclear to run an incident, but that was the incident that he was using and he was the counter-effort in that incident.

So, he has been using this and all of a sudden the preclear says, “Well, I know you processed me for eight hours but I still have pogostickitis.” (That’s a disease that makes an individual bounce around a lot.) The second the auditor fails he goes down tone, because what it restimulates is an emotional drop of tone. And that emotional drop of tone is attendant to switching him from the counter-effort into the effort. So he gets it — bang!

The auditor has a tendency to pick up and use a facsimile to compare it to whatever is happening to the preclear, and he is being a counter-effort in the preclear’s facsimile in order to force the preclear through it. Failure causes him to reverse and become — in his own facsimile, not in the preclear’s — the recipient of the effort. So he picks up the somatic.

In a life continuum, a person dreams up things for Grandpa and he dreams up things for this and that, and he is fully responsible for life in general, but all of a sudden he hits this emotional curve — he hears about a death or he witnesses one — and he dives down the tone scale.

His first impulse is to be the counter-effort and hold it back. Did you ever see some little child about to have an accident? This child is going up toward the table and you can’t reach him in time, and you pull back as the table or something of the sort.

You often get the same thing when you start to feed a little baby. One day I was in a restaurant and Mama was feeding her little baby, and everybody in the restaurant was looking over at that table. Of course, the baby was too busy playing with spoons and things to eat, but Mama would extend the spoon and the baby would clamp its mouth shut and Mama would open her mouth wide. Then the baby would open up and take it. I watched this going on — Mama opening her mouth, and so on, each bite. I looked around the restaurant and everybody in the whole restaurant was doing it. They were all cause; they wanted that baby to eat.

It is this mechanism with which you are dealing. There is how the life continuum happens and there is how you resolve it, and there is also your goal in processing — just to render the individual capable of welshing on some of his bets back in the past and to get in control of all of his facsimiles again.