Hiya.

Thank you.

Thank you.

How are you?

Thank you.

The program today is kind of flat because I haven't got anything to tell you. (laughter)

Want to talk to you, now, about human communication. Would you like to know something about human communication?

Now, in the matter of processes, actually, the oldest processes we have and the newest processes we have, actually, are on one channel. There's one common denominator to all of them. And that is two-way communication. Where two-way communication was missing, the process was unworkable. And thus we had the difference between a bad auditor and a good auditor. A good auditor was one who could maintain two-way communication with his preclear.

Audience: Yeah!

Let's reminisce for a moment. Have you ever had an auditor sitting there, he looked perfectly smiling, perfectly cheerful, he obviously had lots of ARC and he ran this process on you and told you to do this, and you did this and, at that moment, 8,000 Christmas tree lights suddenly appeared out in front of you out here; or your mother suddenly showed up as having stood here for the last twelve years; or some other phenomenon of some kind showed up, immediately — bing.

Communication is, of course, an inevitable problem in any human society. It's also a problem in ant societies. It's a problem. Because the anatomy of all problems is communication.

And you said to this auditor, "Say!"

When you would take ARC, we then add the intention, the attention, and the reason why we're communicating. But communication all by itself will bring into being — as I was telling you a little while ago, the fellow with a piece of pipe finally dreams up an answer as to why he has it there. Just the fact that somebody sees it and comments on it means there has to be a reason for it. And that's all the reason why there is.

And the auditor said . . . (silence)

Well, communication and problems are very intimate. And if we have said that every human being is going around playing a little game of problems and that if everybody that we get to process can have a scarcity of problems and can get to a point where he no longer has any problems, and is therefore very unhappy, we then recognize the fact that the anatomy of a problem is a tangle of communication.

And you said, "But right out in front of . . ."

Now, in almost any language of which I have any cognizance, the word answer (meaning reply) and the word answer (meaning solution) are the same word. But this is more than an identification. This is more than one of these Dianetic phrases that gets stuck and misinterpreted.

And the auditor said . . . (silence)

Remember in the old days, "He rode a horse." R-o-d-e, "He rode a horse," would be interpreted, as a psychotic, on a level with "He rowed a horse," r-o-we-d. See, it'd mean the same thing just because they sound alike.

And you said, "But now the somatics are going all up and down my back!" And the auditor said . . . (silence)

Well, answer and answer can get even further confused because they are the same word. But the solution to a secret is an answer, and the absence of an answer gives us a secret. And that's all you have to know about secrets. There isn't anything more to know about secrets.

And you said, "I don't think I can stay in this engram anymore!" And the auditor said . . . (silence)

Now, you can go charging around all you want to, looking for secrets, but what you're seeking is an answer. And in the absence of an answer, you get a secret. All right.

At which moment you felt more like sending for the wagon for yourself and a .45 for the auditor. (laughter)

We get this condition: we have, this girl named Grind — works at Burlecue Theater. (laughter) Anyway, this girl called Grind is completely out of communication on a verbal level. People walk up to her and they say, "Hiya, Grind. (pause) tsk — huh!"

Now a very funny part of it is, is the processes which we have today, worked on a Scientologist, actually, sooner or later start to unwind all these moments when he was on the time track waiting for the auditor to say something — anything. They start to unwind, these instants, and the time track starts to straighten out as we supply the acknowledgments, the replies and originated communications which should have been there.

And then they see her the next time and they say, "Well, how's tricks, Grind?" (pause)

And when a technique will straighten out auditing without much ado, we must be there somewhere — somewhere because Communication Processing on two-way communication, as the common denominator to all processes, demonstrates to us very adequately why individuals get stuck and fixated on things.

And they see her at a party and they say, "You having a good time, Grind?" (pause)

Well, this might be a joke. It's true, however. They are fixated on anything simply because they are waiting for a reply. Or they're waiting for somebody to originate a communication. Or they are waiting for an acknowledgment. Or they are waiting to make sure that they're talking to something that's alive. And that is what your preclear is doing.

And after a while they tell each other, "You know, that girl has an awful lot of secrets. She certainly knows something."

And when he sits there and you run Technique 97, Technique 64, technique this and technique that and the preclear simply sits there, we might say he was waiting for a change to occur. He is, but that isn't the full of it. You might say that he is waiting for some effect to take place. He is, but that isn't all of it. You might say that he had some idea that you were going to do it for him, and he has, but that isn't all of it. All he's doing is waiting. He's not waiting for an effect or anything else. He is simply waiting for one of these four parts of the communication formula to be fulfilled.

And the fact of the matter is that a microscopic examination of her medulla oblongata as well as her skull, which has probably never before been examined, would demonstrate immediately and conclusively that she not only did not have a secret datum but she didn't know nothin' nohow. But she would get a reputation for being a very mysterious person simply by never answering, which would mean that she would have lots of secrets. Follow me?

And that's why, when preclears get in worse and worse condition, that they comm lag worse and worse. Their communication lag gets worse and worse. They are simply waiting longer and longer and longer. You follow me?

So people, when they don't have — don't have answers coming back from people, they begin to assume that they have strange motives. They begin to assume that these people have something up the sleeve, or that they mean wrong.

We have in, then — four parts of two curves. We have these two communication cycles which make two-way communication. One is originated by self and the other cycle is originated by others. Now oddly enough, there is a third cycle. It isn't three-way communication but it's three-cycle communication. You could actually wait for somebody else to talk to somebody else — two more curves out there, you see. See, you could originate, or somebody else could originate to you and then there could be an additional curve out there, you're waiting for somebody to originate a communication to somebody else, or that somebody else to originate a communication back. Now we've got four, haven't we?

Now, all you have to do is to go out of communication with a business partner to have him hire a set of auditors (of another kind) to audit the books and find out just what you are doing to him. What are you doing to him?

Now, you might be waiting for somebody else to wait for a communication or receive a communication from somebody else through somebody else, and we start to stack up these cycles around here until it would become a high number. So let's be satisfied with two-way communication.

You don't say, "Hello" in the morning; don't say, "Goodbye" at night.

Now, there are just four parts: origin, answer, acknowledgment, live form. Now, "live form" actually belongs in the second place but I've put it last because I've saved it up to tell this congress about it. It isn't in Dianetics 1955! It isn't in The Creation of Human Ability. I want to tell you about this vis-a-vis. And that is the problem of live form. It takes a lot of telling, actually.

And he will very soon come to the conclusion that there's something wrong with the account books of the firm: "This fellow must be hiding something."

Why does somebody get any relief at all on touching a wall? Well, one of the things he finds out — it isn't alive. That's one of the things he finds out. He gets relief from touching a wall. On communication, we also have the problem of terminals. We get flows, discharges and automaticities occurring because somebody puts up a couple of electrodes and we get a current between these two electrodes.

And it doesn't follow at all. What he is doing is adding the R to the triangle. Because the C has dropped out, he tries to put something there on the triangle. You know? "Let's have some triangle, little bit of triangle, please — at least an R. Otherwise, we'll go completely out of affinity with existence." So he tries to get a reason why. He wants the rationality of why this communication is dropping. And because there is no C, then there is no R.

An individual gets a lot of these terminals in his bank, one discharges to another, discharges to another, discharges to another and he gets an electronic relay system. And that, developed to the full, is the human brain: an electronic relay system. The reactive mind, for instance, is nothing but an electronic relay system consisting of a number of these terminals. All right.

Now, people who have consistently failed to communicate to you probably have become enigmas, they have become secrets, they have become people with suspicious motives, people who have causes which are very strange.

The individual's attention is fixed on these terminals. We can, to some degree, get him to put his attention on the wall. We put him — attention on the wall and we say, "Look. There's a more solid terminal called present time that you can discharge against" and this makes him much happier. But that is actually a very simple statement. It's a true statement. But there's a little bit more to it. How did the wall get there in the first place? Well, it got there in the first place because somebody wanted a game. And it stayed there because it didn't answer.

I imagine the failure of the Communist Party to answer up to Senator McCarthy many, many years ago in those dark ages of senatorial investigation, the failure of the Communist Party to tell Senator McCarthy what it was doing, has given Senator McCarthy the conviction, the utter conviction, that they are hiding many secrets. You follow me?

Now, the question of live form comes in here and furnishes, actually, one of the more fabulous processes. We see this communication curve goes: origin to somebody there, to answer, and back — acknowledge. It goes in that cycle. We walk up to somebody, we say, "How are you?" He's there, you see.

Whereas, if you know any communists, you will know they're incapable of holding anything. That's what's wrong with them. They've got to give it all away, you see, give it to the people, and then they never determine where the people are to be given things to, you see. And everybody has got to own everything. Give it all away. They can't hold anything. They have no secrets.

And he says, "I'm fine." And you acknowledge the fact, one way or another, you know, by a nod or just looking at him, that you have received this communication. Well, actually, there's a preliminary communication that involves live form and that is getting the attention of something so that you can communicate with it.

They hire expert people to take all the secrets we have so we don't even have any secrets from them, now. But just the failure to answer up has given many people, like Senator McCarthy, the belief that communists and communist nations have strange, terrible and peculiar motives which cannot be readily understood in a civilized world.

Now, before any communication can take place between two ships, somebody has to stand up there and wag a couple of flags or blink a light very rapidly or do something in order to attract the other ship's attention. Eventually the other ship will go blink-blink and then you're in communication. You'll send a message back and forth.

Now, one of the ways to utterly upset this computation would be if the Kremlin started to answer, or write letters to, or answer all the things that Senator McCarthy was saying. If they just started to pour a flood of communication at McCarthy — supposing this was communication on the basis of:

Well, there's a sort of a little preliminary on communication and that is to have the attention of And the formula of communication itself includes attention, intention and very, very juniorly, interest. Two people not interested in each other can still communicate, and mostly do. So that we have — we have communication taking place between two terminals. All right. If the communication is to take place between two terminals then attention must be procured between these two terminals. And that is not quite a communication but it is very, very necessary to communication.

"We want to put you on our monthly mailing list for the agricultural contest figures for the Four-Star-H." "Here are the statistics of how many nuts and bolts have been found missing on collective farm tractors during the first two months of 1952." "Dear Senator McCarthy, we have understood that you have some interest in bears and we wish to report to you that the Himalayan bear ..

And I ask you to think, now, of someone that you have known, was impossible for you to attract the attention of. Can you think of anyone that you used to have an awful hard time attracting the attention of? Can you think of anyone like that? (pause) I'll give you a little example of this: Now have that person turn around and look at you and say, "Yes?" (pause) Get the idea? All right.

It wouldn't matter what they said, you understand? It would not matter what they said. Just simply a bunch of communication to Senator McCarthy would find him in this interesting condition of believing that the most open and aboveboard organization of which he had ever heard was the Communist Party.

Now, whether you thought of anyone or not, I want you to have a little spot out in front of your face look at you now and say, "Yes?" (pause) Go ahead. Okay.

Japan, by the way, in continuing to negotiate with the United States, was able to apply a surprise attack to the United States at Pearl Harbor. Because the communication was there, nobody in Washington could envision the fact that any lack of affinity was there. And so there would be no reason why anything should occur, like a sneak attack. And that's what we call treachery.

Now, let's have that little spot say, "Yes" some more in that sort of a tone of voice, you know. "Yes?" You know, "Yes? What do you want?" (pause) You get that very easily? Can you have that? All right.

See, the wrong reason why in the existence, and a wrong affinity, actually masked by continuing communication. That's a complexity and a problem. That makes a very neat problem. But what happens to any problem if you start communicating at it or with it or around it?

I'm not processing you. I just want you to see what I'm talking about. That's what's known as "live form." You want a live form out there to communicate with. All right.

Well, let's take a very practical application, one which we know of that's very old. We have a fellow who has a bum right foot and we ask him to "Put a communication line through to your right foot." This is a real old process, way back: "Put a communication line through to your right foot." "Now, have your right foot put a communication line through to you." "Now you put a communication line through to your right foot." "Now, have your right foot put a . . ."

Let's have it say "Yes" a few more times. "Yes?" You know, just like you'd said, "Hey, you!" and it said, "Yes? What do you want?" (pause)

All of a sudden — boom, bang — something occurs, facsimile blows, some-thing happens and the difficulty with the right foot disappears and that is the end of that difficulty. This was a test process. It didn't work sometimes because a person was unable to put a communication line through to his right foot in the first place. He simply wasn't doing so, so his right foot got in bad condition. Right foot out of communication, still being used by the individual, therefore will get into bad condition.

Have it say that a lot of times. Fine. Let's have it say it a lot of times. "Yes?" (pause) Okay.

So, in the absence of communication, we had psychosomatic illness. And that's true. A person who is having difficulty with his body is out of communication with that point of his body, and this we can say very neatly and very nicely. A person who doesn't like his body or who finds something very wrong with his body, is out of communication with his body. We can just draw this instant conclusion. There's no further argument or ifs, ands, or buts about it.

Is that very easy to do now?

If a person says, "Well, I want to get exteriorized because I've got to get rid of that nasty old thing. I don't like that body, it's dirty and it's awful, and I want to get exteriorized." Well, maybe they could exteriorize on a compulsive or an obsessive basis.

Audience: Yeah.

Usually if you said, "Be three feet back of your head" they'd be passing by Arcturus in an awful hurry, they'll zoom! But that is not a rational action.

Yeah? That real easy to do? Have you thought of anybody who didn't do this? Have you thought of somebody who didn't do this? Have you known somebody that didn't? Impossible to attract the attention of. Okay.

The actual way to get them out of the body is to put them in communication with the body, and then get them out of the body. The reason why people don't move easily out of bodies is because they're not in communication with bodies. Get the idea? It's a very simple solution.

Let's find the floor.

Well now, let's take all problems. Let's look over all problems and discover that a problem becomes a problem when communication breaks down some-where. The birth of a problem would be the break of a comm line. Any time you cut a comm line, you get yourself a problem.

Let's find the chair.

Now, it's a fact that you could ignore some communication lines. You could ignore quite a few communication lines — you actually could. You could just walk off and forget about them, you know? As long as you weren't really in communication on that line anyhow, you can leave it alone.

Let's find the right wall.

But let's pick up the line, let's start to fight it: we're going to have a problem. We could ignore it but if we start communicating and then we cut communications, we thereafter will have a problem. It's a horrible fact because you've gone out of communication with a lot of things, willy-nilly.

The left wall.

You lose a ring; you're now out of communication with a ring. Well, it didn't create much of a problem but one of the things that you will ask is, "Where did I lose it?" I think that's one of the silliest problems I ever heard of. You know, this fellow walks in and he says, "Where's my hat? Where's my hat?" He hasn't got his hat and he's going to leave, he's got to go to the office or something, "Where's my hat?"

The front of the room.

And somebody says to him, "Well, where did you lose it?" If he knew where he lost it, he could find it. It's lost because he didn't know where it is. And yet this is the first thing anybody says to you when you've lost something, "Where did you lose it?"

End of session. All right.

Well, here we have a problem resulting from a break of communication. Now that's the most elementary sort of a problem break — problem lost because of communication breaks.

Now, we see this little trick here? That is live form. There is no substitute whatsoever for something live to talk to. There is no substitute for it. The idea of attracting the attention of something is paramount and primary above communication.

Now, the problem is lost when the communication is restored or when processing, or some type of processing just breaks it up as a problem.

Let's look back at the Factors. We've had no reason whatsoever to change the Factors. The Factors are still there and they still ride pretty well as they are. We could add a couple of things to the Factors but it really isn't necessary. And we find that, to create an effect is the primary intention. All right.

A problem actually has mass. There are no problems without mass, really — no problems that would ever worry anybody. Take even arithmetic: "two plus two equals four" never worried you until you had to ask this question, "Two what plus two what equals four what?" Now you really have a problem. You only have an equation before that, not a problem. You have a formulary statement of an arithmetical piece of misinformation. All right.

We get that as a primary intention. How are you going to create an effect on something that won't pay you any attention, if that something doesn't have very much mass that you can mess up? If you can't touch somebody or push somebody or shake somebody to attract their attention, then you're going to have an interesting time of it, indeed. You will begin to believe that they're not quite there, or they're not quite alive, or that they're not alive and they're not there — live form.

Two plus two never equaled four. I mean, the four is over on that side, the twos are there (two what, you know) so therefore you could make some theoretical statement without having a problem. But you could say two plus two equals question mark.

Waiting for something live to show up is what we're doing. You see, it's very easy to go into communication with something that's alive but if some-thing isn't quite alive or something of that sort, then it's not going to reply or signify that it is there so that you can go into communication with it.

Well, the formula immediately assumes that you've put the two twos together to get a four. The truth of the formula is, two plus two equals two plus two. But we have changed communication or condensed communication to get "two plus two equals four" so it couldn't be the right answer — and so it isn't the right answer.

Now, you can go over, if you'd like, and punch holes in the wall, and some-body is liable to get an effect from this, but if you went out someplace to some old abandoned temple nobody cared about and you punched a bunch of holes in the wall, it might momentarily give you a little satisfaction, until you suddenly realized that — nobody there to watch it, nobody there to feel it. You were just punching some holes in a wall — so what?

More mathematicians are staggering around trying to solve problems, where the initial error in the problem is something like "two plus two equals four" they have said somewhere way back in their figures, you know? And then they've gone on and they've gotten the square root, the cube root and all these logarithms. Then you get over on this side and you take the extrapolation of the hyperbolae and that becomes very hyperbolical, and they haven't got the right answer.

State of mind artillery gets into after a while: They never see the enemy and they just keep firing. I've talked to some artillerymen who have really raised havoc with barrages and so on, and these people were totally convinced that they hadn't done anything to anybody. You never saw such a conviction in your life. I mean — "Well, you just keep throwing it over there, you know, and you just keep throwing it over, that's the job. The actual thing we're doing is making a noise, as far as I can understand it," you know — this sort of a frame of mind. The enemy isn't alive. They don't see him. They don't get any response.

So they just add some figures and wonder whether or not that won't give them the right answer. In other words, they go on adding symbols, adding symbols, adding symbols, hoping some time or another they'll get a solution to the problem. And that's what life's been doing.

Now, we have two live forms. And one of them addresses the other one to cause an effect upon it. And then this one who had an effect caused upon him, turns around and causes an effect upon this first one. And you have a game going, and that's the basic anatomy of a game. That's the basic intention of a game: to create an effect, then backwards, create an effect; then the other way, create an effect; then the other way, create an effect.

Break of communication: "Well, now if we can just add enough symbols over here, see, why . . . Well, that didn't work. Let's add some more symbols over here. Well, that didn't work. Let's mass these things up now. All right.

Now, when you get a scarcity of effects, you have very many interesting mental conditions occur. But it's based on scarcity of live forms — scarcity of living beings, scarcity of living things. So, we have somebody come up and he says, "Oh, terrible, terrible, emergency, emergency, disaster, disaster, crisis, crisis." What's he trying to do? There's no crisis. There's no emergency. He rushes in and he tells you, "All of Scandinovia has just gone into revolt," and you find out that somebody issued a bulletin that said he didn't like the mustache of the existing king.

"Is that right? No, that's awful puzzling. Well, let's put some more symbols on this thing and add that up, and get a higher level of complexity if we possibly can, and then maybe it can be solved by theory of equations and we can just skip trying to solve it by arithmetic. All right.

This person has become frantic about, "Yes . . . ?" you see. No live form turns around to him and says, "Yes? What do you want? What are you going to say?" or "Yes, I'm listening." You see? And every time he's tried to create an effect, this live form has simply said . . . (silence)

"So here's some more symbols and some more symbols, and we put some more factors. And now we'll discover some more data and pull that in on the problem, and then some more factors and some more factors and some more factors and ... All right.

And then he went ahead and created the effect but he didn't have the live form's attention. If he didn't have its attention, of course, he couldn't create an effect at all. So out of this, we actually get an evolution of a communication lag. And of course, when we get a communication lag, we get a reality lag, an agreement lag, we get an affinity lag. All out of what? Waiting for somebody to say they're there so that you can get on with the game.

"Now is it solved? Well, we don't know, we've forgotten what the original problem was." That is the way life has gone. It has added more and more data, more and more masses, and more and more complexities to a point of where it's forgotten what the problem was.

So that we have these games which are composed of a known terminal and a hidden terminal: known terminal, hidden terminal. Such a game is cops and robbers. And the cop eventually becomes utterly frantic because there are very few criminals around waiting to say, "Yes? We're listening." But the cop knows that he has to discharge against something, somebody, some terminal, and he can't go and find this criminal, you know.

And actually, the dynamic principle of existence, discovery of, shouldn't have been any discovery at all. The problems are based on this basis: How long can we play this game called survival? Well, the way you win the game called survival is to survive.

And a robbery is committed and the next thing you know, why, the police are scattered all over the place trying to find a robber and he doesn't show up. He doesn't walk in the police station and say, "Yes?" You'd be surprised, the police would probably dramatize and go almost psychotic if robbers and so forth, started to make a practice of walking into police stations saying, "Yes? I'm listening. What did you want to say? What do you want to know? Yes, I'm in communication."

"Wait a minute. Wait a minute. You . . . How long do you have to survive to play this game?"

So we get this hidden terminal. We get the known terminal and the hidden terminal. Every time you lose something you may feel a little bit frantic. You feel a little bit frantic; you say, "Where is that? Where is that? Where is that? Where is that?" And one of your reactions is, "I'll just get dozens of those things," you know, "I'll get dozens of them and put them on the shelf. I can't find those combs. I'll go down and buy a whole display card full of combs and I'll put those up there and then — then, that will work."

"Well, you just have to go on surviving."

When an individual gets into this frame of mind, and if he loses too many combs and he is unable to get display cards full of them, or even after he does get display cards full of them the kids keep eating up the card and so forth, even if he does all this, why his next move, of course, is to leave his hair uncombed. He doesn't even look for a comb. He knows there's no comb there. Every time he thinks of combing his hair he thinks he'll have a cigarette. See, he can't have a comb, so he can have a cigarette.

"Now, just a minute — if we have this game called survival, the winner of the game is one who would survive longer than anybody else. That would be right, wouldn't it? Well, how does anybody survive long enough to prove that he has survived?"

And then the government comes along, puts a sufficient tax on cigarettes so he can't even have a cigarette to quiet your nerves. Only way a cigarette would possibly quiet anybody's nerves is simply by being there. You know, it's a handy object which can be a nice substituted object and you'll always make nothing out of it, too. And so as a result, you'll get this hidden-terminal affair. All right.

And nobody knows, and that's the joke, which makes quite a game. It's the ideal game that goes on forever.

The police go out — what do they eventually do? The police go out, they're looking for the burglar, they're looking for the criminal, they're looking for criminals, burglars. Who did it? Those terminals are not available. They're not standing there saying, "Yes?" So the police, to keep from going utterly psychotic, start questioning somebody, and they usually wind up questioning any honest citizen they can lay their hands on.

Now, the problems of that game are the problems we have to solve in order to survive. But the funny part of it is, we actually can't do anything else but survive. It'd be utterly, physically, thetanesquely impossible to do anything else than survive. A thetan has to work very, very hard to put periods on lives and discover everything new again, and run the glorious irresponsibility of being a baby, you know, and say, "I never lived before, I don't know anything — ha, look at me — don't know a thing!"

This is sufficiently severe and significant in this society or any civilized society that police will eventually get into a state where the "criminal" is the honest citizen. They will just invert. And they will be very punitive.

And we would believe that, and we would buy that if we didn't take — let's say we take ten children. And these ten children have had an equivalent environment and there's never been a piano around any of them. None of them have even vaguely heard of this thing called a piano — theoretical experiment.

They will graduate into government, and you get a fascist state. You could say by new definition that the definition of a fascist state would be that state in which the police became so frantic in their inability to find criminals, that they eventually, in an effort to find somebody who would listen, started to look at the private citizens who were honest. And then because they didn't listen with any great degree of patience — became the government of those people. That's what could be called an evolution of a fascist state.

Now, we take these children and with a good instructor we start to teach them all how to play the piano. They see the piano for the first time, they see the music for the first time.

By the way, there are a couple of such states have formed; one was in Germany, one was in Spain — now, just that way, the police graduated into the governing role. Missing terminal — so they have to find a terminal. They have to have a terminal.

We find out one of them who has good manual dexterity, can't play the piano. He can't touch it. It upsets him — the thought of coming near a piano. And another one, he can get near the piano and play bink, bink, bink, bink but he can't read the notes. He can read English, he could learn French, but he can't read notes of music. Whhhh! Well this is a wild variable, isn't it?

And let's look at this communication formula again. Let's find in this communication formula here — let's just take one lobe of this and let's take here, [See chart 5 in the appendix] the first point, up here, that we will call Bill. And this point over here we will call Joe. And then this point here we will call Joe prime, and this is Bill prime. We get our parts of communication — just to go over this with you again — this first Bill up here is "origin" (0), and this first Joe here is "live form" and this Joe prime here is "answer," and this Bill prime here (the final Bill prime) is "acknowledgment."

Well, there is no sense in looking in his cortextural response which runs between his korgypsky and his oblongata. There's no sense in looking in there because the answer to his inability to play the piano is because he played one once and he lost. He went out of communication with a piano and now he's being expected to pick up communication with a piano again.

Now, these people — these two people engaging in communication with each other would have an awfully hard time of it if they didn't use a little bit of energy to represent themselves. They themselves do not have any real mass or energy but they can mock up some, agree that it's there, across a space that they are making and agreeing upon with communication. So we have cause (C), distance (that line), (E). Cause, distance, effect. And then we have cause prime, distance, effect prime. And we get one cycle of communication.

He's not going to pick up communication with a piano because if he picked up communication with a piano he'd pick up communication with a life. And the game he has to play is this: "I've got to show myself that I can't survive in order to prove that I can survive. We've got to have nonsurvival in order to have survival. And if I went and remembered all this stuff, all the way, then . . ."

Now this necessitates, we see, lower here, actually two terminals. When this gets real solid and when people start really working on it we get these two terminals. We could call this terminal "B" and this terminal over here "J." It wouldn't matter what we call them, "A" and "B," Brown and Smith, or two electrodes on an electric motor. You'd have the same thing. Let's take alternating current. And we find out that alternating current is a communication flow going back and forth.

"But then look-a-here, you'd win. You'd prove that you'd been surviving."

Electricity is a dramatization of what life does. Life is not doing a dramatization of what electricity does. Your electronics boys are good boys, there's no doubt about it. Their scientific methodology and so forth has been of enormous assistance. The scientific methodology which I have applied in scientific research in the field of the mind is extremely useful.

"Yes, but I wouldn't have any liability on the game of survival," you see?

It's a practical way of thinking about something. But why is it a practical way of thinking about something? Well, it's because what life — that's what life's doing. And after a while, particles wait long enough and get solid enough and are mocked up solid enough so that you have this fascinating condition known as terminals — two terminals: "B" and "J."

What's wrong between this kid and the piano? Now we take the remaining eight kids. We found one that just — OOOhh — he just even couldn't touch a piano, one that could touch a piano but couldn't read music, and eight more, and they all have more or less equal manual dexterity. And they sit down and they, "Do, re, mi, fa, sol," "every-good-boy-does-fine," "f-a-c-e," and finally get to a point of where they play the piano very nicely — very, very nicely.

You can do anything with these terminals. You get them fairly close together, run a little wire in between them here and you're liable to find a slight difference of charge. If you were to take any pieces of iron — any two pieces of iron not hitherto connected, and run a wire between them — no way you connect them, you see, but you just ran a little wire between them, you'd find there was a momentary flow, ordinarily. You know, they'll equalize, then, their potential.

Except one of them — one of them is all of a sudden playing Prokofiev, Grieg, Brahms, Mozart, Bach — without the music! But of course we can over-look all this and say the cortextural responses of the korgypsky are such that they replot. And we hope that's an answer, but it's not an answer.

But if we keep insisting that one of these pieces of iron is hotter than the other or is — by pounding on it, is more active than the other — you will find that you get a little electronic flow going across that wire all the time from "B" to "J," "B" to "J." Now if we were to pound on one of these pieces of iron and not pound on the other one, we would find an electronic flow would result. That is one of the older forms of demonstration in physics.

Fact of the matter is that the fellow who couldn't touch the piano at all had some terrible failures on the subject of pianos. He probably tried it many times and was successful once, is stuck in some wins and then he failed and failed, and then he just says, "Pianos — I'm out of communication with them. I don't want anything more to do with a piano." He said this. "Don't want any-thing more to do with pianos or concert halls — nothing more to do with pianos. Thank you," and he's true to his word a few lives later.

Now, if we took a piece of cat fur and made these two terminals out of glass, something like that, and we rubbed one, we'd find the — if we had a little meter hanging right here on the middle of this line, this little meter would read current flow.

And the next one was a composer, and oh, boy, did it hurt every time somebody put out a new, more popular tune than his. Cost him money, cost him fame and there he is — sniff — his music neglected. So he gets to a point where he won't look at anybody else's music. He won't have anything to do with it. It's completely nonsurvival to touch somebody else's music.

We don't care anything about this. This is just a dramatization as far as — on the part of the MEST universe of what life does. The basic mistake that has been made in all of this is a very simple mistake. I've made this mistake too, so I know it's a mistake. And that is that life is mirroring the physical universe, or that it is behaving as it does because it has the example of the physical universe before it. You get the idea? That life behaves as it does because it has the physical universe before it. That is not true. The physical universe behaves as it does because life makes it behave that way. And that's the truth.

So we sit down and we say, "Now that's f-a-c-e and every-good-boydoes . . ." — this guy can write music, see. And we say, "And now, this is the way you play "Tom and Ned out in the snow, now they're playing Eskimo," and that is the way you play this piece. You see? And that's what you do." Blaaa! But he could sit there and go bink, bink, bink; but he wouldn't read music. All right.

Now, why is it the truth? Well, because when you use that principle it works! And when you say, "Well, life is going along acting as a mirror to the physical universe," you don't get anything. You don't get any results. You don't get any results in processing. You take that theory and you apply it, saying that life is simply echoing the activities of, or is derived from electricity, or something of the sort and it just doesn't work at all. So we go at it the reverse, and we say the physical universe is doing pretty much what life wants it to do, and we're pretty close to the truth. And that is the truth.

Now, let's take this — we have several kids there who merely learned how to play the piano just completely nyaah — you know, set them up: "Now, company, here we want to show you how Roger can play the piano," you know, and everybody has to sit there and listen to these boo-boos — the boo-boo rag. And so, seven of them were like that.

So that we find this big formula of communication, two-way communication, in which this is one cycle represented here on chart 5. We discover that as it solidifies, you know — let's take a part out of here, let's say, live form missing, and yet the fellow keeps on communicating: "Hammer," you know. He keeps on communicating, but no live form is there. Nobody has said, "Yes?" He'll get into a stuck flow, here. He'll get into this — [writing on chart] I'm drawing very heavy here — he'll get into a stuck flow and he'll be going along like that, and he'll get into this two-terminal activity down here. See? And he'll get a current going straight across that wire and become, who knows, an electronics engineer someday.

But this remaining one — this remaining one who just played everything, and that's very fine — all of these people have a variation of experience on the subject of pianos. And all of them have a varying degree of communication with regard to pianos. And this last one who could really play everything had never really had a win with a piano, he'd never had a lose with a piano, he had simply studied a long time on a piano, and he was all ready to go and somebody suddenly put him down at a piano and said, "play f-a-c-e, everygood-boy-does-fine," and he was very tolerant of that and went on playing Grieg. But he himself didn't know how come he did this. He would be the most innocent fellow you ever talked to.

Electronics engineers are good men, but they have the frailty of falling into their own trap. They start to depend upon electronic flows. They start to depend upon pieces of brass and copper and glass in order to accomplish these things. And so when they — usually, when then they start to theorize, even as I did when I was first in this work, they will come to all sorts of remarkable conclusions. They will always, inevitably, sometime or another, get interested in the mind.

But once in a while I will get down on my knees to a little of three year old and I'll say, "Hey, what did you do in your last life, bud?" And he'll look at me, "Who wants to know?" And by the time they're four it's usually been beaten out of them so they can forget with glorious abandon. But take any three, four months old baby, and if you refuse to credit their noncommunication with you, you can go into easy communication with.

Your boys at MIT right now, and so forth, are very interested in the mind. They're not interested, though, in the human mind. They're interested in an electronic mind. And once in a while one of them will speculate — I promised Norbert Wiener I'd never mention his name in connection with Dianetics so I won't mention his name but this fellow . . . (laughter) It's too bad, too, because I was quite happy he wrote that book called Cynergetics or whatever it was, and he talks about a neural response system. And this book about this neural response system, Cybernetics, has applied the principles of electricity to life. And it tries to demonstrate somehow that life comes about because of electronic flows. And it doesn't.

The funniest thing I ever saw was a two months' old baby that couldn't understand a word of anything, didn't pay any attention to anything or anybody, but every time you picked this little baby up and said, 'Well I think we'll keep you around," the baby would say, "Sigh!" — never sighed otherwise.

That's the basic mistake made in engineering every time an engineer starts out. And I have gotten finally, even up to my big toe, out of this morass now. I know this. I mean I know that electronics come about because of life. I know that masses and forms, their arrangement, their timing, their continued existence comes about because of life; because life can create these things. And if life can create these things, then life is certainly the boss.

And you can do that to almost any kid — pick them up and say, 'Well, here's a good one. Think we'll keep him around. We need him."

These things, these electronic terminals and so forth never create life — never. And when life lays off of them they stop running — just like that.

"Gee!"

One of these days, if we keep up this sort of thing, why, Westinghouse will probably eventually require the morning ritual of the prayer to the god Ohm — if we keep this up — the patron saint of electric terminals. Or they will require that a certain amount of insulation be burned every evening after work to appease — to appease the god Forest who makes tubes — makes tubes work. We might say it's probably the spirit of Edison is all that makes an electric light burn. It's probably true.

But they can't talk English yet — the vinyl plastic sheathing is not yet formed around their neurons. (laughter)

I don't know, actually, whether or not this physical universe and all of its laws work because these engineers invent new laws, or because they find old ones. But we know this very well: that when we have two terminals here, we know that a straight communication formula can get into a terminal arrangement.

We get into the most interesting series of problems you ever saw in your life when we start to believe that a person is in communication with Earth and humanity for the first time. This makes a fascinating series of problems — problems called eugenics, heredity — and none of them have ever wound up anyplace but the garbage can. These problems are just endless. There are whole libraries to explain this terrific behavior on the part of three of these kids.

And instead of Bill talking to Joe over here as a live form, Bill gets convinced that Joe doesn't exist or that he's dead or he's gone or something, or that he can't answer, and so he starts to plug away on this line, plug away on this line, plug away on this line. Something has got to be there, so he'll mock up a terminal over here where Joe is.

We put somebody into a sort of a trance and the person starts to talk French but the person has never learned any French. "O000h, how do you explain this?" Well, the easy explanation — it never occurs to anybody — the person can speak French!

Well, he'll get tired of flowing at just a terminal, a wall or something like that, so he will mock up a terminal. Bill will mock up a terminal where he is to flow at where he put a terminal for Joe. You see? Nice automatic system, isn't it? Now he's got a flow between two terminals. He inhabits a body; he hopes that that thing over there is Joe inhabiting a body, and he's got flow between two terminals or two bodies. When you are studying terminals, you might as well say bodies. There isn't any reason you shouldn't because these are the way they act.

Now, wherever we look in the field of humanity, we find that we've got, whether playing a piano or driving a car, a great difference of ability expressed by the individual. This ability could have two sources: One, it would be that people are not necessarily all just as bright as everybody else. This is not necessarily true, but let us assume that it had some basis. Then how do you account for these strange contradictory vagaries, and what would you categorize them under? It would be under this: the make and break of communication. Whenever they have broken communication they have gotten a problem.

Now, what happens after an individual has started this terminal arrangement? You can see how Joe as a body talking to Bill as a body, or Bill as a body talking to Joe as a body, is actually two terminals in action with some kind of a flow going in between. You could see that easily.

These people, these kids we're talking about had broken or not broken communication with pianos. Now what's the proof of this? Now, I mean, we just lay it down like that. Say this person is a bum driver, therefore we assume that he has broken somewhere on the track, somewhere, communication with vehicles — seriously broken communication with vehicles, you know, just chopped it — had communication, then broke communication with vehicles.

Well, what would happen here if Joe didn't have a body at all, and Bill didn't have a body at all? Well, I'll tell you what would happen. They'd have to talk all the time. They wouldn't ever dare set up anything on an automatic response system or anything of the sort. They would have to — in order to continue their conversation, they would have to stay in very close contact with each other.

We get the army, and we find that this fellow can shoot and that fellow can't shoot. Well, the fellow who can't shoot has seriously broken communication with weapons. And just start explaining all these vagaries and differences of skills more or less in this fashion.

And rather than do that, why, they invent something called absent-mindedness or other-terminalness or bodiness. So that they set a body there in the chair and Mother's talking to the body, you know. And they say — Mother says, "Now — now, Joe, after this, I want you to realize that you're breaking your mother's heart by getting these bad grades. And after this, I want you to realize that you've got to study harder and you've got to amount to something in the world like your Uncle Bill." And she can go on like this for hours and Joe's body sits in the chair, and he goes off and examines the daisies — very handy mechanism. Life has uses for it.

We'd take somebody, then, who really could shoot, he'd go out, he's a kid — a kid did this one time. I never saw so many writers lose so much money in my life. This little shaver, he was about nine or ten, walked into my studio. I had a big studio many, many years ago — had this big studio and at one end of it I had a target rigged up that had a cotton back to it so that you could fire in the studio, you know. And rainy days I'd sit there and bang away at the target when I wasn't doing anything else, keeping my hand in.

Now, it'll go a little bit further than that. In addition to bodies as terminals, they start getting other types of terminals. They get invisible terminals which nevertheless have mass. They get all sorts of — kinds of terminals that discharge one against the other.

And so I had a couple writers come and see me, and then a couple more came down and see me and then three or four more arrived and we had a weekend and we — quite a weekend. So, Sunday morning everybody was pretty bleary-eyed and we were sitting around, and I picked up the small air rifle I was using for target practice and shot at the target, and handed it on to another guy and he shot at the target.

Let's get a picture of this fellow running a drill press down in the factory. And he's got this foot on this drill press, see, and he presses this thing and a bar comes along the assembly line and he's supposed to drill a couple of holes in it. And they're in such and such a place so he comes along and he presses it, moves it up to the next one, presses it, pushes that along. Gets the next bar, presses it, gets the next bar, presses it, moves that along. Gets the next bar, presses it. Next bar, presses it; you know — wuhhh.

Well, of course, we started betting on this after a while, and we started throwing in a dime a shot and making a pool, you see, and then the best shot would get this pool. Well, one of these boys couldn't take it very much, so he started throwing in a dollar a shot.

After he's done that for a year or two, he's liable to set up a terminal back of his leg here somewhere that, every time this thing goes "click" in a certain way as a signal, this terminal back of his leg will lift his leg and drop it again.

This was getting serious. I was the host, I couldn't object to this, but I did at least have the good grace to abstain right about this point. But my abstaining didn't help his luck out any at all. See, it was my rifle and my target--that wouldn't have done to have won money. Well, that's a fact. Whether the other guys were better shots or not, my experience with that particular target would have made them real sore.

He is no more aware of lifting his leg and dropping it. He's no more aware of his hands fixing that bar in place. He has become a machine.

But one of them had brought his little boy along, a little boy about — oh, I guess the kid was about nine — little Mac. And little Mac walked in the door and he heard this going on. Well, of course that was his sort of weapon, you know, small weapon, air gun. And he says, "Daddy, can I have a turn?"

And you'll find many of these fellows who take jobs of this character have only one ambition: They want the kind of a job where they can set up some sort of an automaticity like this and then dream daydreams — to dream up things and think of things and invent fairy tales for themselves and so on. They like this.

And his father who was losing very heavily at this time says, "Go away, Mac. Go away. Go away."

You go around a factory and question a lot of these fellows that are running these repetitive-action machines, and you will find that they are very, very fond of highly mechanical jobs that they can set up on an automaticity, you know, bang, bang, bang. And then they sit there and they say, "Gee, wouldn't it be nice . . . and Marilyn Monroe walks in, and then I say, 'Hiya babe!'" You know? They're floating off someplace by themselves.

And the kid says, "Well, just let me shoot once."

They don't have to put their immediate attention on these terminals and don't have to give attention to get some kind of an action done and get the rest of the machinery enough food so it will run. Sounds strange, doesn't it? But that's actually what they're doing.

So I said, "Go on. Go on. Let the kid shoot once."

They're doing the work so that they can get enough energy to feed enough energy to the things which will do the work, so that they can get enough energy so as to feed enough energy to the machine so that it will work, so that they can get enough energy in order to feed it back into the machine, so they will feed enough energy into the machines . . . One day they'll come up to you and they'll say, "You know life has no purpose!" That's right, it doesn't — round and round, round and round.

Father says, "All right," and throws down a dollar for the kid. I hadn't intended the kid would get into this pool, see.

Well now, any engineer has learned to regard with extreme caution anything like a perpetual motion machine because it doesn't happen in the physical universe that he can observe — a perpetual motion machine. By his experience, all machines wear out.

And he cleaned them! (laughter) I can just see that kid now, back in the Kentucky hills, years before. One of the people that he cleaned was an ex-sergeant of Marines and a distinguished marksman present at matches. You can just see that kid now — because the kid was not shooting the way he should have been shooting. He'd throw the rifle up to his hip and fire, and it'd be right in the center of the target. (laughter) Now, somebody can explain that by environment, maybe, but this kid's environment was a New York apartment.

But unfortunately there is one: the life energy-space production unit itself goes on and on and on and on and on and on and on. And having no moving parts, having no mass, having no wavelength, it never wears out. But it can play silly tricks on itself. It can forget. It can channel. It can do all sorts of weird things.

Now, these differences, on make and break of communication — if this were human behavior and the problem of communication amongst people, why, then we certainly ought to be able to use the dickens out of it, shouldn't we?

But if you took all the things growing on Earth and had them feeding everything that they were getting, you know, into machinery, round and round, and round, and round, and round, we would have to introduce new energy all the time in order to justify the energy in heat loss which was going on. And we do have new energy all the time. We have the Sun. The Sun goes across and furnishes enough energy and there's enough old stuff lying around and old life deposits and things like that, that these machines can keep up.

Supposing it's just making and breaking communication, not affinity, not any reason why but just make and break communication with the object. Supposing we just reduced these vagaries of behavior down to that. How about it? Supposing we had this thing down to a point of where it was simply make and break of communication in any sphere where the fellow had a disability. Or we use make and break of communication more wisely in any sphere where we wanted to increase the fellow's ability. All right.

The reactive mind came about through some breakdown in the communication formula. For want of a terminal, he put one up. He made a facsimile, you see, of some sort. He didn't have enough terminals so he put one up.

Let's take somebody — here was an actual case. Somebody wrote in from London the other day — quite amusing. This lady had gone down and taken a driver's examination, and she'd gotten into the car and she'd said, "What gearshift?" and gone around the wrong way, around a couple of turns, and the examiner had said, "Oh, no." So she'd left. She was feeling very sad about it because she couldn't pass her driver's examination. Now, she'd passed a perfect written examination, something like that, as far as I know, but couldn't drive well enough to suit anybody.

Lack of answers eventually makes him anxious about answers. Lack of originated communications gets him stuck on originating communications.

So her husband, a Scientologist, decided that he would do something about this. So he put this into practice. He took her outside and made her touch and withdraw from the car: touch and withdraw from the gearshift, touch and withdraw from the wheel, touch and withdraw from the hubcaps, touch and withdraw from the license plate, touch and withdraw from the motor — a half an hour a day for a couple of weeks. And when last seen she was driving with no assistance, license in pocket, through Piccadilly Circus.

Any time that thing breaks down, it starts to jam and you start to get more and more massy form. Life evolves itself into a necessity to have terminals. It has to have terminals, it thinks, so it evolves itself into tighter and tighter terminals.

And everybody knows that nobody can drive through Piccadilly Circus. (laughter) All right.

And you get all of these crazy phenomena that you find in a preclear — all this mad phenomena. You get circuits and you get facsimiles and you get recording machines and you get things that evidently think and do things. When he thinks of being someplace, why, he has the impression he's there, or when he thinks of being someplace, he actually goes there if he's an exterior.

We'd apply the same principle on a little higher, less romantic level jet pilot. And we would find this jet pilot had lost his peaks, you know. He was still a good pilot, you know, but he no longer quite hit the landing strip straight. He landed once in a while twenty feet above the strip. And his CO is hoping that he doesn't start landing twenty feet under the strip.

Gadgets, gadgets, gadgets — all kinds of gadgets: arms, legs, brains, noses, lungs — all kinds of gadgets. They're just gadgets. Thetan gets gadget-happy. And then he gets some ritual involved in it, like chew your food thirty-two times, sleep eight hours per day — rituals, so as to justify his possession of all these gadgets.

And what would we do about this boy, knowing this data, assuming this data is true, what would we do? We're handling two things now — we're handling air, we're handling a vehicle, and one other thing incidental to air, called height. We'd go out there and make him make and break communications with that airplane and every part of it, and we'd do it an hour a day for a week or two. Just take him out there and say, "All right, now you see that stripe on the tail," — Step A, Opening Procedure 8-C, with an airplane — "see that stripe on the tail, go back there and touch that. All right. Let go of it." You know, we'd chase him around the plane, have him touch it — make, break.

Now, a fellow has something. Then somebody comes around and says, "Why do you have that?" Fellow's got an old pipe. It's been lying on the living room table. Old piece of pipe — and there it is on the living room table. And somebody comes in and says, "What on earth are you doing with that piece of pipe on the living room table?"

Now, we'd have him touch air. How would we make him let go of it? We'd exteriorize him, of course. There isn't any air up there a couple of hundred miles — not enough to bother with. Three hundred miles is the air layer, they say, but the last time I was two hundred and fifty miles high I don't think anybody could have breathed — fact, it looked awfully like a vacuum. But you could actually make him reach and withdraw, while exteriorized, from air. That sounds mighty fancy but it's pretty easy to get a guy out of his body today — trouble is keeping them in. A black V told me that the other day.

Well, actually right up to that point it was — simply had some mass, that was all, and it was an interesting gimmick because it had some mass. He's got to invent a reason, right now. And quite often he will be conscious of the fact he is inventing a reason and conscious of the fact that right afterwards, that is the reason it's there.

Oh say, some fellow wrote me the other day on the subject of black Vs and white Vs and exteriorization, which was very cute. He wrote me a letter and he was very angry. There'd been something around called a white V. I'd heard about this thing called a white V — it was a person who thought he was out and who could see the room and everything, but he was really a white V.

And he'll do this in such close order that he thinks he had a subconscious reason to have it there. So he says, "What tricks are my mind doing now?" He just invented the reason out of whole cloth. He did it himself. He says, "Well," he says, "I have that to clean my pipe." Person looks at him and he's likely to take him seriously. But he says, "That's right. It's just a gag. That's what it's there for. It's a big piece of pipe and I have to clean my pipe, so . . ." This person looks at him skeptically and says, "Hmph." So somebody else will come in, see, and — you see what happened? That was an unsatisfactory communication to the person, you see. They came in. They saw the pipe. They wanted some reason to have a communication or a conversation so they said, "What is this pipe doing there?"

And I never knew who the devil invented this thing called a white V. It's just a black V's excuse for not taking the guy on a Route 1 tour or something, you know. He says, 'Well that guy really isn't out, he only says so. I mean he isn't out. So I can't see him, so therefore he isn't out."

And this fellow says, 'Well, I use it to clean my pipe."And this, they didn't — you know, improper responses and it's just not good, that's all.

And, so he wrote in and bawled me out for making a crack about white Vs and said that the crack was deliberately aimed at him, personally and individually, for inventing the word white V So I wrote back and thanked him very much, I hadn't known who had done it up till then.

So the next person comes in, why, he says, 'Well, what are you doing with that piece of pipe on your living room table? Look at that beautiful living room table and that old, rusty, ugly piece of pipe lying there. What are you doing with that pipe on the table like that?"

Here we have just make and break of communication. Well, you exteriorize this boy. And you make him reach and withdraw from air. Or in a body, you could simply make him feel the air and then not feel the air, and feel the air by moving his arms, by taking him out, by getting some air — air, you know?

And the fellow says, 'Well, I read sometimes, and I use it to hold open my books." And they'll look at this as an impractical piece of engineering. And they'll realize it's dirty and will get the book dirty and so forth and they say, "Humph." Unsatisfactory communication.

And now let's find out about distance. And let's make him find some distance and then not pay any attention to it. And then find some distance and then not pay any attention to it. And find some height and then take his attention off the height. And find some height and then take his attention off the height. And then find some height and take his attention off the height. And funny part of it is, his depth perception, his ability to fly, would come way up above — it was when he was a cadet.

Another person comes in and sees this pipe lying there and this guy by this time — see what he's doing? He's getting more and more reasonable about this. He figures out, he can't pull a bum joke, he can't give a bad engineering reason, he's really got to have a reason why that piece of pipe is lying on that table.

Now, let's supposing this fellow goes down, he wants to belong to the Royal Air Force or something, and he walks down and he gets himself into a place called the Examiner's Office, and they say, "Strip and cough."

And it's never going to occur to him to move that piece of pipe. That piece of pipe will stay there. People are objecting to its being there, he thinks, so this makes him dogged. He's going to leave it there in spite of anything.

And they get him there and they find he's a perfect physical specimen, he's in good shape. He gets two fingers together and they only miss by four inches. His reflexes are good: they hit in the back of the neck and his big toe jerks. They kick him and he moves. And they say, "This fine physical specimen now is going to be a pilot."

They walk in — the next person walks in and says, "What are you doing with that piece of pipe on that beautiful table?"

So they send him to ground school and then they send him other schools, they send him other schools and send him other schools and send him other schools and finally get him close to an airplane, having expended considerable sums with time, considerable time which is there to be burned, after all.

And he says, "As a matter of fact, last night I came down here about two o'clock in the morning and I heard this noise. And I didn't have a gun so I rushed out back and I got this piece of pipe, and the burglar ran out the front door and I didn't see him again. And I just happened to put the pipe down there and forgot about it."

And they get him all set up, and he gets one foot on the wing of the airplane and gets airsick. And they say, "This is strange. Well, take him up anyhow, it'll show him right." But after twenty hours of instruction he not only has not soloed, he has also not been able to keep breakfast down. They find out that he can't stand on his bed and look at the floor without getting airsick.

And the fellow says, "Gee, that's interesting." Ah, he's stuck with it.

It's like they used to get ninety-day wonders — never occurred to them that some of these boys might get seasick. And very, very often we had to put two petty officers, one on each side of one, in order to hold him up on the bridge long enough to stand his watch.

People who are doubted will always finally make a production out of their reasons — complete production. And after a while, he'll get to believe that any time he wants to explain anything that no reasonable explanation — no reasonable explanation is possible. He's got to invent something. He's got to dream something up.

And we found out it was bad philosophy to let them go below just because they were seasick, because nobody was ever anything else in corvettes, except people with cast-iron stomachs or people who didn't have any stomachs at all, such as mine. It was the only thing that could live on a corvette. But they never asked these fellows whether or not they got seasick or carsick or anything. This was not part of the instruction.

Well, he'll get tired after a while, of dreaming something up just because everybody comes along and says, "What's that pipe doing there?" He'll get tired of this. So he'll set it up automatically. And he gets a reasoning machine which adds all the factors into this side and pulls them all out that side and they run down the ruddy rods there, and it sorts them all through and it says, "People have not been interested in this pile, people have been interested in this pile. People haven't been interested in this, people have been interested in that. Burglars, robbers ... too exaggerated ... my age is now such-andsuch and therefore what is expected of me is so-and-so," and after it gets all down through the hoppers, people walk in and say, "What is that pipe doing there?" And the machine pipes up and says, "Do you know that is actually a part of the battleship Maine, that was dredged up." And he finds this is the perfect response.

So they get this fellow way up there. What can we assume about this pilot who has been trained at vast expense and now can't stand any height and gets sick all the time? What can we assume about this boy? Well, we can assume that he can't stand communication with an airplane. That's all we have to assume. I mean, we don't have to assume anything else.

And he finds the machine is more able to give him answers that are beneficial answers to other people, than .anything else, so now he's got the machine.

But as we're running him, the funniest thing will turn up. It'll turn up that two hundred thousand years ago on another planet which is not too far away from here, they'd had airplanes just like the airplane he's being asked to fly. And this is highly coincidental, but this is the kind of airplane they had there. And the kind of airplane they have here ... Hmm. And this kind of blows off. But of course we don't even have to pay any attention to that. We don't have to validate it — that a couple of hundred thousand years ago was the last time he cared to have anything to do with an airplane and after that broke communication with them completely.

Next thing you know, this machine starts to get more and more active. It finally tells him what to do, what to eat, what to wear, where to go. Next thing you know, he's got it inside of a skull and it's called a human brain. And when he wakes up in the morning he has to bow down to this thing — and burn a little insulation to it every night. And that's what we've been studying all these years.

We start putting him back in communication with the airplane and these things turn up. We don't pay a bit of attention to them today. We don't even vaguely pay any attention to them today, we don't care whether it happened, whether it didn't happen, whether it's valuable, whether it has nyaaah.

We've been studying this thing called the human brain — if we were really studying the human brain. Actually we stopped studying the human brain with Science of Survival to a very marked degree because we found out that there must be something else present besides a bunch of machinery.

We'll leave that up to the psychologists of the twenty-fifth century to research. I think he will have heard by that time that the reason he's been out of a job for four or five centuries was Scientology. We don't care about these things.

If you were to walk in a plant which was in full operation, you would be suspicious if you found no living thing anywhere in the plant. And if it was sitting out in the middle of a desert and you were unable to contact anybody who had anything to do with it at all, although you searched day after day, why, you'd decide after a while the place was haunted. Very least, you would decide it was haunted. You couldn't conceive of a huge plant running full-gun sitting out in the middle of a desert with nobody running it just running.

All we know is that people go out of communication with something and then, if that break of communication has been made by them in a final enough state, they won't, further, have anything to do with that or any skill connected with it. All right.

Well, that's actually what an engineer does when he takes a look at this human mind. It's a big plant. It's doing the most fantastic things. It goes on running, running, running, running, running, running, running. Must have some purpose in life so he decides after a while — or at least I decided after a while, it must be haunted. Must be something alive around there. I didn't buy this story about neurons. Last time I invented one anyhow, it didn't work. It kept synapsizing terminals with me. (whistle) (tsk) — terrible. (laughter) All right.

This makes all of us doctors of education — every one of us. We had a boy in here the other day, a very interesting fellow — been with us for a long time.

So having decided it was haunted, I yelled into this big plant and I said, "Hey you! Get out of there!" And the fellow did. That's the history of research of Scientology.

He's a nice guy. He's been intimately involved with the operations years and years and years and years. And we said, "Learn those axioms." He was a nice guy, he was a prince; but we said, "Learn those axioms!"

Now, you can see — you can see here, if we're up against a problem of fixed terminals, if we're up against a lack of communication parts, lack of communication origins, a lack of live forms, a lack of answers and a lack of acknowledgments — if we're up against absences on these, and if these things do get us stuck and fixated one way or the other, and if these things do become these terminals that we find as demon circuits and other things in the human mind, if they do, then it should evolve that an individual would exteriorize and come off of these terminals and fixations with ease the moment that you reestablished the quantity of these things, these origins, live forms, answers and acknowledgments which should be present. He should just pull right off terminals, just like this. All right.

And he said, "N0000! — under no circumstances. Bring on your whips, bring on your chains, cut my throat, give somebody else my post. I can't, I won't." And then we had him mock up textbooks saying, "Hello" for a few hours, and he now knows all the axioms. This man's former training is that of an instructor or teacher in the field of education and he'd just seen himself one too many textbooks, that's all. That was all that was wrong with him. It was causing this much upset.

I have run some experiments in the past, and I've been processing preclears for quite a while, and have run some experiments definitely associated with people fixated on demon circuits, and have run Group Processing here at this congress. And it all demonstrated that these fixed terminals, these missing terminals, invisible terminals, all of these items, gadgets, gimmicks on which people get fixated, came apart — fell apart.

That's a funny thing, isn't it? But not very funny when you consider that a book is an inanimate object. It's not alive. It's a pretense. It's a fake. It's a pretense that the author is standing there looking up at you from your lap saying, "Yap, yap, yap, yap, yap, yap, yap." And he's not. He's probably off with a blonde somewhere.

And I found out the body, if a complex one, was just another such ballup of communication terminals. And that by restoring the abundance of origins, the live form, the answer and the acknowledgment, that people backed right on out of their heads. "Say — what was I doing in there?" And when I say people backed out of their heads, I mean it. We ordinarily mean people as somebody who walks up in a body.

And although the information is there, the live communication of that information is to some degree missing. And if that information does not lead intimately and immediately to the solution of the problem of the textbook, sooner or later, that textbook is going to become aberrative — don't care what the subject is.

Well, let's specialize it further. Let's say somebody who drove up in a Cadillac, that's a people. Now, if somebody couldn't get out of his Cadillac, you'd think he was nuts or something was wrong. Well, you would, wouldn't you?

Now, we all know these perfectly plain things about the — you know, examples like the young doctor: He goes to medical school and the first two years of medical school he has everything that he reads about. We know that. You know, they come in and they say, "Oh, what a horrible disease; your nose swells up and it causes itching, itching — (oh, oh no, my left eyebrow has itched lately), and this happens generally to young men (whistles) — (I'm sick!)"

Audience: Yes!

And that's a fact, that's the history of a young doctor in training. He gets everything he reads about. And don't think that a psychiatrist doesn't. And don't think that an old-time auditor didn't either.

Well, how about these guys that can't get out of their bodies? Same thing — it's just a vehicle. They're too lazy to walk around themselves, so they eat, and feed a body, so the terminals over on this side will activate against the terminals over on this side which will activate up here and activate across here, and then they'll get a ridge that goes into action there, that opens and closes their eyes, and so they can see that they're not walking into anything. And they get an alarm reaction system in the endocrine glands so as to tell them whether or not they should be scared of what they are looking at, and they take their body down the street, only — big joke — there's no driver anymore. The fellow isn't even driving his body anymore. His body is taking him around.

Well, why? Why? Why? Why does this occur? It's just because the textbook is a symbol of life and is not, in itself, life.

You know, I see a lot of big cars on the road and I watch them because it's very amusing to me when I discover that the car is taking the person somewhere, and the car is doing all the driving. That's fascinating.

Now, here's a very funny thing: The CECS — been kicked around an awful lot but actually shouldn't be kicked around. All it's been trying to do is just exactly what it says: Committee of Examination, Certification and Services.

You'll see them go into situations — any situation which is terrifically routine and ordinary — any routine or ordinary situation, they'll just get through fine. But give them a slightly extraordinary situation, which just is a little bit offbeat — like, instead of just stopping down to a certain number of miles an hour to go through a school zone, why, the kids jump out in front where there are stop signs, you know. You know, it's just a little bit offbeat.

And its mission is to keep the communication lines as clear as it can. And it actually hasn't taken very many overt steps. It probably intends to take some more. At one of its last board meetings it said that it decided that it could still be punitive, and that all was not sweetness and light everywhere, that it insisted on communicating, and it said so.

And these cars will do the silliest things, and the people in them will look like they've just been awakened from a nightmare. They'll be very startled because all of a sudden they are being asked, of all people, to make a decision for this very wise car.

So, it isn't dead by any means, but somebody as far away as Australia in one direction and London in another direction, already shudders every time anyone mentions the CECS, and of course they blame everybody but me which is the way it should be, see? (laughter)

Now, I dare say, even today, thetans have cars all hooked up. I imagine they have machinery all hooked up to cars, I'll bet you. So that all they have to do is kind of think at the steering wheel and that activates. And they think at this and that will move, and so forth. Of course they're using their hands and their arms to do this sort of thing, but their hands and their arms are under the control of the car's machinery, rather than otherwise.

But, actually, the punitive thrust, the punishment, is not the mission. And the only thing that's happening is occasionally somebody's been cutting Scientology communication lines. You know, he's actually been cutting a communication line — actively.

Well, this is automaticity. But we see somebody going down the street, the car's taking him down the street. All right.

By the way, one day there was a publication being published, which a person, we'll call A, thought was very funny — thought this publication was utterly uproarious. And thought, "Boy, that publication was really getting off some quips, but it was really, really needling Ron and the HASI." And this person, you know, thought that was real funny, "Eh-heh!"

Let's look at this body walking down the street and find out the body's taking somebody down the street. There is somebody there. That somebody doesn't have mass. That somebody doesn't need terminals. But that person is as fixed in his body and as fixed upon his circuits, as fixed upon his facsimiles and his engrams as he has lacked communication parts in the past, and as he is waiting for. He is as fixed as he is waiting for communication. And we have the basic law of this and so we have the resolution of the human mind.

And he came in the other day and he was white and gray, and ready to kill! — ready to maim! He had a fifteen-hundred-dollar preclear all signed up, ready to process, and that preclear got a hold of that publication, decided that Scientology was a lot of bunk, and knocked off the processing and went away.

Thank you.

And now, auditor A no longer has this sweetness and light attitude of, "let everybody talk — even when they cut communication lines." That's the history, then, of the CECS. It doesn't like to see a communication line cut and it knows a communication line could be cut if somebody were too obsessively mauling around the communication lines of Scientology.

Supposing somebody came in the office every day and took all the files and papers and so forth, and threw them all up in the air. You'd have even more of a chaos than you've got now. And that's actually what happens in the society.

When we put out a communication it's the experience of a half a dozen auditors with regard to a certain type of process, and somebody who is a poor auditor, at best, comes in and says, "No, that's a lot of bunk, yap-yap-yap-yapyap, funny gag," you know, "wa-wa-wa . . ." What's he doing? He's taking those papers and throwing them up in the air. If he wants to say something about it, let him find out something to say. See, that's the difference.

So that's what the CECS is interested in. It doesn't want to see the communication lines of Scientology utterly messed up. Well now, it has a very nice decision to make, doesn't it? Very horrible. Whose communication line is it going to cut if the general policy of the organization is, "Let them communicate."

So if the CECS is in argument with anybody, it's in argument with the organization because it has to keep the communication lines as clean as it can and still stay within the bounds of reason. So this is a rough deal. Anybody occupying that post is going to have some fun anyhow. He's certainly going to have somebody to fight.

By the way, most of the fights that occur of this character really occur for one real reason only, just one reason, and that is that there are insufficient things to fight. There aren't things which are worthy of being fought. Actually psychiatry is not worth fighting, you'd look in vain for a live terminal.

Well, let's get back to books. The book is not a live communicating thing, is it? When you say, "Hello" to the book it doesn't say a thing. You've got to turn over a lot of pages and then one page or another will say, "Hello," if the word happens to be in the book, but it has no intent or direction, does it? It really doesn't give you attention. It is something you handle, that you push around, it is an object, and that's a book.

And after a person has been going just so long at books, whether writing them or reading them and so on, and has to a marked degree stopped looking and talking to and communicating with other life forms, he gets over here with a scholar's squint, fixed upon the printed page and no longer with any attention for life at large. He's simply operating on a scarcity of answers. He thinks that books are going to give him answers. Look at that. He thinks that books are going to give him answers. A book can't answer anything. It can't say a word. You see, a book can't answer anything.

But there can be this strange thing which has occurred: an analysis of what a book can or cannot do so as to actually get an answer out of a book. You have the preclear put a book out here and have it say, "Hello." And if this man has been an instructor or if he's been a writer, it'll practically kill him. It's the most violent thing you could do to him.

Have a book out here say, "Hello" and "Okay" and so on. Or get a real live book and set it up here, and have it say, "Hello," "Okay," and so on. Follow me?

Yet the book is better than no communication! So the first thing the fellow fell out of communication with was life itself or he wouldn't have transferred his attention over here to the book, would he have, hm? He must have gone out of communication with life, over here to a communication with a book as better than no communication. All right.

If this is the case, then we must assume that the main thing wrong with life is not the fact that it is out of communication with existence but that it is out of communication with life. That's the first thing we'd have to assume.

Therefore if we'd want to make somebody well, we would audit him, and we'd put him back into communication with life with a two-way communication. The very fact that you as an auditor are sitting there, a live being, talking with this person, would be sufficient to that degree — put him in contact with existence and life. And that's quite a process all by itself, if it's followed with a two-way communication. We keep the cycles going and just works out beautifully — answers, back and forth; acknowledgements, origins.

Where we have depended upon machinery, energy, space, time of any character, to make up for this lack of communication from life, we've gotten, to some degree, in trouble. There's just that much less communication.

Now, all you have to do with the individual is to restore his ability to communicate in any field where you wish to restore his ability. To restore his total ability, it is only necessary to restore his ability to communicate with and in that field. And this becomes very simple.

Do you know that there's many an announcer who walks up to a micro-phone and shudders. He is afraid. He's upset. You know why? This happens to them when they've been at it a long time mostly. It doesn't happen to the Johnny newlys.

That microphone has yet to say hello, and yet it's been talked at and talked at and talked at and talked at. And he'll identify the microphone with the receipt-point of the communication line. And having identified it, then he actually will begin to expect this microphone to say something. And it never will.

The worst thing you could do to him would be to rewire or back-wire a microphone so that someday when he's saying, "Hello folks out there. How are you Mr. and Mrs. America?" the microphone would say — a chorus: "Hello, Joe."

The inanimate object becomes a substitute for the live object, and a nonlive thing made out of space, energy, mass, time, will never substitute for life. And fixation upon these inanimate objects will bring about, at length, a break of communication even with them.

So the first thing we do to restore ability is to put a person back into contact with the physical universe itself. That's the first thing we have to do. And having done that, we can put him into communication with something alive. And having done that, we've got a Clear. That's all there is to it. It's real simple.

Now, there is no reason why a Doctor of Scientology, a Bachelor of Scientology, HCA, should not be called a Doctor of Education because with such a process, he, amongst all educators, could achieve education. The very funny thing about it is that it really means education anyhow — DSCN, BSCN, and Doctor of Divinity.

By the way, Doctor of Divinity and Doctor of Scientology mean the same thing — mean exactly the same thing. Divinity simply means knowingness or wisdom; how to divine, divining, predicting, forecasting — same word. Divine: how to forecast, how to know. And a Doctor of Scientology is a Doctor of Knowingness. So a DD or a DSCN — one wonders exactly why we've got so many degrees that say the same thing. They look pretty on the wall and they actually have been very, very arduously won, to tell you the truth.

Now, by knowing that it takes a make and break of communication — and that alone — to restore ability, such a person is in command of wisdom because wisdom comes about to the degree that a person can make and break communication with existence. And ignorance and stupidity come about to the degree that a person has ceased doing so. When a person stops communicating, when he breaks off communication and says, "Nevermore," he has established an inability or a stupidity in that particular field.

In order to keep himself from breaking off such communication, he very often keeps around tokens — like the football player, the football star of 1932, has probably still got his football, you know? He's still got a picture of himself and the team. He hasn't completely broken communication with football. That little token there keeps him in.

And then a little bit later, when he's lost the football and lost the picture, and so forth, he'll still keep some facsimiles or mock-ups of some kind or another about this football. And he'll still know that they existed.

And then after a while he hides them utterly and they become completely secret. And after that, in that hidden state, they hurt him or kick back against him every time he tries to reassume communication with the game called football.

And so it is with the game called life. Everybody has hidden the game called life in the form of terminals, unknown and hidden masses in their universes to such a degree that when they start to touch life something hurts. The tokens jump up, they say, "Oh no, we've broken communication with that." And that's why people aren't as alive as people should be.

The entire mission of the auditor is to rehabilitate ability, and the entire method of doing that is to rehabilitate communication in all directions regard-less of whether they're broken or not. And so, we know all there is to know to make all the Clears we want.

Thank you.