This is the last evening lecture of the lecture series, December the 18th, first hour.

This is the second lecture of the afternoon of December the 18th, and we are continuing here on this chart of havingness.

I want to talk to you something about how you talk to people about Scientology.

Now you may think that I’m making too much… too much action here – a little bit too much randomity for you by giving you this material. But I’m giving you, in this lecture, an option between one and two things. I could simply process some people here, and I intend to do so but uh… this afternoon, but I want to have in circulation and in your hands enough material so that you can actually do some extrapolation – that’s a wonderful word, EXTRAPOLATION – people look in vain in dictionaries for this word EXTRAPOLATION – uh… it isn’t INTERPOLATION because that’s „find the point in between…“ Someone… and so let’s go out further and discover it.

And we’ve been just getting along fine here on an informal basis, we’ll just keep on. Somebody has to change the spotlights.

Uh… mathematics could be called extrapolation. it… it’s what you figure from, into. That’s just what we’re doing in present time, you see – it’s approximation. We’re predicting the havingness change and estimating the rate of change of havingness when we’re estimating the future.

Anyway. The conviction which you are trying to carry is a conviction of action; it is not a conviction of reason. And as such, you actually need a little preparation, not on the catechism basis that they give in some of the… some of the cults on this line whereby anybody that asks you anything then they have the pat answer for it. Let’s go at it on a reverse vector again.

I want you to know about these thing’s because you can do some thinking on this basis and you will discover probably some very interesting material from this, because this is only a barely, slightly explored field. When we start to talk about time’s rate of change… time as a rate of change of havingness, or not-havingness…

There’s a lot of people tackle a guy on anything that anyone knows. What is invalidation? Invalidation in actuality is the impingement of force. That’s invalidation.

Now therefore, its first and immediate value to you in therapy shouldn’t be overlooked. This is possibly the first analysis ever made of psychosis that is really a good solid mechanical analysis. Why is a psychotic always in the past? Your neurotic is, at best, in the present. And your people who are sane are doing very well in the future. They’re thinking into the future, consistently and continually, and it could be said that a man is really as sane as he can think into the future.

The lowest level a person can get on the tone scale is not wanting to criticize – not wanting to be critical. That’s as low as a person really can get… is not wanting to be critical. Because criticism builds right on up into invalidation, and that’s a gradient scale and it goes from criticism on the aberrated or stimulus-response thought level, fades on in to emotional reaction, counter-emotion to somebody’s activities, and goes right straight to the next point of the gradient scale which is counter-effort. Now, there’s your three levels, and of course they come up from that. As a person withdraws from force he goes down from the application of force into not wanting to apply the force so he applies emotion. And not wanting to apply that so uh… he applies an aberrated stimulus-response thought, and then not wanting to apply the stimulus-response thought, he gets into a much more involved situation than he would normally propose.

Why is this? That says, „A man is as sane as he can predict and estimate the rate of change of havingness and not-havingness.“ Hmm. As long as a man can predict the rate of change of havingness and not havingness, he is quite sane. And when individuals are unable to predict the rate of change of havingness and not-havingness, they are unable to predict. And are not sane. When they’re unable to predict it, they’re just unable to predict it, then it makes out of them what? An effect.

We’ve got here a question which you probably need in order to settle some of this in your own mind, and that’s simply here on this graph; we have here our 20.0 (it has been days since I used one of those) and here’s… down here is 0.0. And let’s take a look here and we’ll find this is an action level in that area somewhere around here: 20-22. Now action can carry with it, but does not necessarily carry with it, the delivery of force. But it certainly carries with it, the delivery of effort of one sort or another, but it’s the type of effort that you wouldn’t ordinarily recognize as effort because it’s in such wide space and delivered so regulatedly that it is very closely monitored and activated effort. So, you don’t call that effort as the effort band as we know it. But that’s a harmonic, an upper harmonic of the effort band. Or you could say that work and matter themselves are the lower harmonic of this, the actual action band or effort band. Action becomes solider and solider and solider and eventually becomes matter.

Now the rate of change of havingness and not havingness could be considered to be cause. Therefore, cause is motivated, then, in the future. Cause isn’t in the future, though, because this tells you that cause is flow and energy. Oh, nonsense! You can’t have time without, space, energy and objects. There isn’t any time without those items. And the most pertinent of those items are and the best estimation done on those items is rate of change of havingness of the… you… now you have this…

So let’s take a look at this center band, and let’s plot three things which you should know of pretty well in thought, emotion and effort, and find out where they lie here and this actually is in effort band.

Now let’s… let’s predict what’s going to happen tomorrow on the planet Xerxes. Can you… can you predict that? What’s going to happen tomorrow on the planet Xerxes? No, because you doesn’t have any havingness on Xerxes, that’s all. I mean, there isn’t any present time there, so how can you predict a rate of change there?

Now, let’s take a look above this. I won’t bother to put a number on it because that number is just a meaningless arbitrary, but this next line up here when I say above effort is what? And the next line up above this is what? Way up here above 40 is a thought band. Okay?

Rate of change – my God! How could you possibly predict a rate of change when you don’t even know what’s changing? So you couldn’t predict the future and as far as Xerxes is concerned, two conditions exist: You are not interested and it doesn’t immediately influence you; or, if interested, it again doesn’t influence you. So what?

Now, those… you never… you’ve never saw those… those words on that tone scale before in that order. Because that sensation band Is actually emotion. That’s high-toned emotion, but it’s… higher-toned emotion Is sensation. Lower down it’s sort of… the emotion band is sort of an effort emotion; MESTy, very MESTy Now, this… this is. this is very airy. You are up here around space; that thought band up there is postulates. A little bit lower than that we have agreements. Now, maybe we’ve never quite looked at it this way before.

Now it’s only when a person is interested in havingness of a present time that he can become non compos mentis with regard to that present time. A person must be interested in havingness to be insane. And by definition here in this universe, a person must be interested in havingness to be sane. You also must be interested in not-havingness to be sane. Hmm-hmm-hmm. Where are we going?

Remember what I said about DEI as being a harmonic uh… uh… DEl being cycles within cycles? Well, this cycles within cycles theory is actually the same theory as harmonics, and you wanna know where harmonics come from in radio, music, piano music uh… where they come from in electronic waves of any kind, sound or anything of the sort, you look at the cycle within the cycle. There is the „grand cycle of the whole band“ and the whole change, and then there’s these intermediate cycles. DEl was a little piece of the big DEl Scale – desired and enforce and inhibit. All right.

Uh… now, an unknown datum doesn’t disturb you a bit. The planet Xerxes, his state of government or what is going to be printed in a… publication there uh… tomorrow by some loose-moraled fellow doesn’t even vaguely interest you. And yet it’s an unknown datum.

Now, let’s go down here and find out we… now that we’ve gone to effort, let’s go to something else. And let’s get down below this, and we’ll get… and boy, we are really in here now, just below this we get emotional and uh… sensation. Up here it’s kind of enjoyable, down here you get an emotional sensation. What do you get under that? You get an effort band.

And you’ll find your psychotic has gone mad because of an unknown datum. He doesn’t know what’s going to happen in the future. That uncertainty concerning the rate of change of havingness and not-havingness. He’s become so unsettled and so upset about it, he can’t predict it, that he’s become psychotic about it. And as long as he is…

Now, what do you get under that effort band? You get what you’ve been calling a very high level emotion and right in that strata there you get about the highest level of reason that man’s attained. And here again we have thought. And I suppose this could be plotted out – I’m not giving you all the harmonics here by a long ways – and uh… effort, emotion. Now, let’s have thought again. All right, let’s have effort again, although it doesn’t matter. It just doesn’t matter whether we add these things on, it’s just what you… it’s just gonna be this cycle. You can take chunks of this cycle and you will accurately locate which one of the three that you’re plotting at that time or not as the case may be. But it could be all the efforts on this tone scale, and that could be effort-effort-effort-effort-effort-effort-effort. What were all these efforts? Or it could be emotion-emotion-emotion-emotion-emotion. What were all those? You’ve got a name for practically every one of ‘em; sensation high sensation, exhilaration is enthusiasm on a lower part on the band, and… and… and boredom is actually a lower harmonic of being calm, a very low harmonic, MESTy.

You see where we’re going? Interest. Interest is the monitoring action. Where there is no interest, there isn’t any insanity. Of course, there’s also nothing.

And we get down here and uh… we have found again maybe these three. And then we get way down here, and we get heavy effort again.

And so you get a… an interesting, but not monitoring or terribly sweeping, common denominator to past, present and future, and the state of mind with regard to them. And that… that is monitored by interest in it. „Do you care?“

Now, actually we’re… because we’ve been studying this from the viewpoint of homo sapiens, at 0.0 effort area (that’s not 0.0 effort, but uh… just in that area), effort, emotion, thought; now, we’ve gotten down here and we get a heavy brand of… oh boy, these bands really get thin; they really get awfully close together; these get packed tight right down at the bottom.

Uh… ah… the great Rabelais tells a fascinating story whereby two characters were in battle and everybody is sweating and streaming blood and… and uh… brawling, and… and these armies are crashed together and interlocked, and it’s toe to toe and slug, slug, slug. And… and… and these two characters, for some reason or other, to catch their breath, withdraw a short distance and uh… climb a little hill. And they look down in the valley and they see these little tiny figures down in the valley. And they’re just moving like little tiny dolls, and it becomes so unimportant to them that they begin to laugh. And they laugh very heartily about it and, of course, just stretch out in the sun and that’s the end of the battle as far as they’re concerned.

I couldn’t draw – I’ll have to give you little sections, some sort of an idea over here under the 0.0 of the… the bands as they would get together there – there’d just be so many together the area would just be completely black, they’d be repeating themselves so often and so close together. Here Is your geometric progression at work and it starts up from way down below there and matter starts in from the top, wide, less wide, closer together and packed right on down tight.

You want to know why theta clearing can suddenly produce such a change of viewpoint in an individual, I’m afraid it’s contained in that data that I’ve just given you. Estimation of the rate of change of havingness is either interesting or very interesting or terribly interesting or, „Oh, my God! We’re lost unless…“ And that’s being… everything is serious and important.

A piece of matter is actually thought, effort and emotion all at one and the same time. This is a new thought to you maybe; it’ll be less of a new thought when you pick up matter sometime and you can feel what it has to think. ‘Course, it doesn’t have any think in it at all, except it’s a sort of a solidified thought. It… it… it… it just has that appeal value to it.

Now what is… what does ‘serious’ and ‘important’ mean? ‘Serious’ and ‘important’ are words put down to „interest is intense because of penalty.“ And you could say „importance is an interest… an intense interest because of penalty, and it is as intense as the penalty is envisioned to be intense.“ That man who can not be made to feel any pain from hunger, rain, snow, ice or the other things they have in the post office department, he, you see, wouldn’t be able to feel any penalty – unless it were the penalty of being bored and that is a penalty itself.

For instance, this… this… ashtray… this ashtray has a prettied up thought in it. It doesn’t… it doesn’t say ‘ashtray’; it is saying ‘pretty piece of pottery’. And whoever made it and so on, this is the thought that went into it. ‘a pretty piece of pottery’. And yet it can exert an effort, can t it? If you direct it. And it can uh… do all sorts of things. Uh… and it has… it has an emotion. That’s very strange, it has an emotion something like agony. That’s very weird. It… it has an actual emotion. Well, anyhow. You think I’m kidding you. You ought to try that sometime.

Boredom, however, is just not a state of inaction. It is a state of idle action, vacillating action, where penalties are yet in existence. And where they are great. But a state in which one has decided he can’t really do anything about them, it’s just a high-toned apathy. And it… it… there’s a certain insouciance that comes along with boredom; there’s a flippancy.

You ought to ask a piece of matter, „Now, what emotion do you…“ Don’t go nutty on this. You ought to ask a piece of matter sometime, „What… what thought is in you? What effort are you capable of? And uh… and uh… what… what emotion do you express?“ It’ll sometimes be very startling to you what a clear-cut certainty of answer there is sitting there under your gaze.

Now what, then, is ‘sanity’? Well, let’s rate it there… It would be „unable to predict the rate of change of havingness and not-havingness with regard to one’s interest in those things which are changing, and with regard to the penalty which one believes may accrue from not being interested in those things. That’s a clumsy definition. It will come down in size and shape. But let’s look at it again: It… It’s… ‘sanity’, then, is monitored by what one can gain balanced by how much one can be punished because of have and have-not, and the unpredictableness of the changes which might take place in have or have not.

Because you’re dealing with a piece of MEST universe that originally came out as a thought, and a thinkingness, and a beingness, and an emotionalness and all these other things. Well, as things condense, these bands get closer and closer together, and closer and closer together and closer and closer together until all of a sudden you’ve got matter.

The goal of a static is to be a static. The goal of an ‘all motion’ is to go in all motion. And as we see the interplay of a static against all motion, we find out that we have a theoretical point of action halfway between these bands where the penalty could exist, but would not sweep away all, where havingness is not the most important thing.

Now, it’s very amazing to pick up a cannonball, a small cannonball of some sort or another that’s lying on a battlefield; it’s still thinking the same thought, if you can call that thinking. There it is, more or less made with it. Why? Its… its present time is ALWAYS. But ALWAYS at the bottom of the scale.

Now havingness becomes more and more important to the psychotic until he will give away anything, or he will take and hold on to everything. And he thinks… objects and words and everything else. So his interest is terribly aberrated. And his belief in pain is terribly aberrated, and if you get somebody who is very psychotic, they’ve either abandoned the body to a point where anything could happen to it, or the tiniest little scratch is regarded by them as destruction beyond destruction beyond destruction.

You get very quiet when I mention this to you. But there’s… there’s a very funny thing about this. It’s… it’s… it’s a fact you see… you are putting into something the emotion which it expresses, but you are also capable of contacting the agreement which brought it into beingness. You’ll understand this a lot… a lot more; we re clarifying an awful lot of things that man has felt, and felt that he felt, and thought that he heard, and tried to pin certainties on to them. Well, there’s no use trying to put a certainty on to this stuff. It’s just funny or amusing.

So, uh… theta clearing just side-steps the whole problem by deintensification of havingness; and by almost completely eradicating the penalty of not having, or the penalty of having. It is not a retirement from the lists; it is not an abandonment of anything. But it is an ability to come into the control and ownership of things, and therefore a person’s stability as a theta clear would depend upon, yet, their interest and evaluation as pertained to their body and – what Freud called the ‘alter-ego’ – all the other possessions of the body, like the family and uh… uh… the car and all that.

When anything gets down from clear up here above 40.0… let’s take a… let’s take some electrons running through a line, and once upon a time somebody said „Let there be light.“ And you’ve got an electron running through the line, and your engineer comes along and he fools around with this electron going through the line. What’s it got to say about it? It’s got something to say about it. It’s still there; it’s still a piece of beingness that it once was, and it’s still banging around in the exterior universe, and here he is, and somebody else could take him and shoot him down the line – put him down a piece of copper wire one way or the other. But it’s not a him, it’s not a personality; it isn’t a thetan that’s decayed.

A little light begin to break through on this.

Although it’s very very peculiar, you get way down small and then try to look at things of this order of magnitude, and they apparently have a sort of an aliveness to them. It’s fascinating to behold. But it’s held together by a thought basically, and that thought in impinging in various postulated spaces condenses, ‘cause this space condenses and the thought made space for the existence, and therefore you’ve got a condensation of beingness which becomes a condensation, and in this area here of the center, you’ve got a condensation of action so you have considerable activity taking place. You have enormous volatility of elements. The volatility of elements regardless of temperature or anything of the sort would take place along that 20 level.

But the funny part of it is, we can’t subtract anything from this universe because of this doggoned rate of change of havingness. This universe will either blow up or solidify one way or the other, if one were to subtract from it, out of any one of its equations, let’s say this: One, two, three, four, six, seven and eight – and leave five. He wouldn’t go, would he?

And then you’ve got harder and solider and solider and solider and you’ve got energy. And you get a preclear in apathy, but you can get a preclear in apathy that’s actually gleeful, and that’s ‘the glee of insanity’. He’s in apathy about doing anything; he’s really just practically right there on the verge of tears any minute, and what’s he do? He cackles and screams with laughter over something. So you’ve just got that down further and further and further and all of a sudden from this effort called apathy we’re down lower on the band, lower on the band, lower on the band, you’ll get some PC and you can put your foot against him; woo… you could actually almost put your MEST hand against the man’s ridges and give him a shove when he walks in the door. You almost can do that; I mean he’s that far out, and he’s that hard and that solid.

Or, the universe, if he did make it, would blow up, on what subject? The fifth dynamic. You’ll find, then, that inequalities of interest and an unbalanced state of interest on the part of the preclear – that is why we’re interested in „can’ts“ – resolve down to an inability to draw out in a balanced state. He’s got to take all eight dynamics out of the equation if he’s going to leave this universe – all eight – simultaneously. The universe’ll never miss him.

Well, you get way down, you compress it too tight, you’ve got plutonium, you get boom’. A new thought. Now, you could put it on a circular pattern and say, „From that came all new thought.“ Nope, it’s just under too much stress, because, boy, there is nothing that makes MEST like plutonium. It makes more MEST into enMEST in less time than any other known element.

But if he tries to take all eight except two out – nnohhh! It’s not just going to miss him, I… it’s not going to let him go because, you see, the universe seems to represent a havingness and have-not-ness. It… it… it, to some degree, owns your preclear. Every time he has a line to it, it has a line to him. So any time he says, „Well, I’m just fine except for the second dynamic. I still seem to want this sensation from these bodies, and so forth. They’re a disgusting thing, these bodies, but second dynamic – hummm!“

Well, so we’ve got these bands tight packed down together here.

It… it… it doesn’t just mean that your preclear is holding on, because it means that there’s a great big cable around his neck and it’s got him nailed down to a stake. And as long as he thinks he has to be in this universe in order to indulge that sensation, as long as he has to have something else to undo it besides himself, oh boy!

Now, when you speak of ‘counter-effort’, do you mean a bust in the jaw? There’s counter-effort, a bust in the jaw. It’s down in this band here someplace. That’s invalidation by force. Or do you mean this: highly measured, terrifically competent, enormously controlled and regulated delivery of force as an impact. That’s still invalidation. Boy, there’s nothing like an invalidation which is done with force and extreme competence. Your fellows get out there on the football field and that sort of thing, when they’ve been beaten by a team that is enormously skilled, oh, do they feel silly. Why it’s invalidation, measured in force, but it isn’t in terms of „Well, we’ve gotten down to a point where we’ve all run out of ideas, we’ll mash each other’s bodies up.“ That’s irrational; it’s still a game up here.

Now, you see, he is four parts, as e homo sapiens. And so when it comes to subtracting the thetan from the body, he has to have a body with which to enjoy other bodies, he thinks, at the state he’s in. Now let’s draw it up a little further and demonstrate to him that he doesn’t have to have other bodies; he doesn’t have to have a body of his own in order to procure this sensation from other bodies; it isn’t necessary for him to have a body of his own. He can just take it off of any body any place. „Well,“ that fellow says, uh… „that’s great!“ Your preclear is still nailed down in this universe, because every one of those bodies will put a line on him for every line he puts on them.

All right, let’s take what’s… what’s a sensation, emotion here? That’s very, very high-toned stuff for homo-sapiens to be… exhilaration and so on.

And uh… that’s how he came down tone scale in the first place.

Now, let’s look down here at effort on that band. Well that would be a light feather-touch as far as that’s concerned, but it would again be terrifically competent, very competent. And as a man goes down tone scale he begins to do things like regret his own competence, because it delivers too many overt acts; it hurts, then, to be competent, so he goes on down the line.

So, we have to then shift it over to ‘own universe’, and he has to be able to mock up a havingness or not-havingness on any one of the dynamics, and particularly where interest is involved. He has to be able to create anything he is interested in and continue an interest in it in order to get rid of MEST universe havingness and not-havingness. And nobody’s recommending to you, really, that you get rid of this havingness and not-havingness in the MEST universe.

So, we get into this band down here: emotion. Well, that’s probably the emotion that most… emotional band, that most people use… listen to the theater. Why, most people that… when they get really high toned, they probably would get up that high on sensation. Maybe that is as high as sex goes; this… this… this band here that’s just a second emotional band above zero. Oh, way down here at the bottom of course where they’ve got that black line, all those things are more or less packed together, no differentiation, all identification; thought, emotion and effort all become the same thing.

But I’m just telling you that the interest monitors it, and that is monitored by one’s belief that it only exists – the other thing, scarcity, in this universe – that there’s a penalty in leaving the universe, and the penalty of leaving would be the penalty of not any more having something, ugh… You see?

Well, what’s criticism? Of course, if a fellow is fencing, and he crosses foils with an expert and that expert just undoes the buckles of his mask or something of the sort, with the… the button, meanwhile while his opponent… I mean, while this fellow is fencing like mad trying to hold off the expert and the expert simply unbuckles his… his mask and takes it off and starts to unravel his fencing sweater. It would sound to me like that’d be a little critical, wouldn’t it?

All right, this universe is rigged this way: Every time you want something in this universe, you can’t have it. If you really want something, long enough and often enough on an outflow for it, it, of course, if you do get it, it’ll disagree with you. And so it’s a dwindling spiral operation, and by electronics this goes down… As we were talking about very interestingly the other day, this DC flow problem. There could be no DC flow; if you changed viewpoint as fast as you changed polarity, you would think you saw a DC flow. Now, that’s very good – that’s very good. A fellow in class mentioned this – very interesting. But if you insisted there was such a thing as a DC flow and never changed your viewpoint, you would have to have lower and lower and lower and lower potentials. And the… the lower the potential, why, you get another flow, and then you get a lower potential and you get another flow to it, and then you get a lower potential and you get another flow to it. And there’s, of course, no place to go but bottom, and it’s mud from there on down.

So we get down here, it’d be any… any level of that is, you could say, it’s a criticism. Well, invalidation we think is uh… to ignore but to meet with force could also be invalidation. So it’d be two kinds of invalidations. ‘Validation’ would be the positive thing. There’s always a third little thing lurking around in any of this material, and this is called the ‘null point’. You’ll see it on the cycle of action; you’re always running into the null. The cycle of action has at its exact center CONSERVATION; START, INCREASE, NO CHANGE, DECREASE, STOPPED. That really is the cycle of action. There’s a complete maybe right in the middle of the cycle of action. You see why that would be? It would be the null point between increase and decrease. It would be the null point between growing and decaying; there is a plateau in there where something hits. Why is it a plateau? It’s an effort to maintain the state, and of course that requires a maybe. The way you maintain the state is to have a maybe, and if you get somebody wanting to really act slow just throw a maybe into his computer and he’ll maintain the state all right. You can get almost anybody stopped if you completely balance his computer, you get no action, and you get an apparent… a stop which… which is called CONSERVATION.

Now if you got a… a viewpoint which decided that your potential was going to go up all the way, it would have to be a negative gain, and you would have to continue the negative gain. As long as you continued this, you’d go on up tone scale and out the top. But you would have to do it on all eight dynamics. This is not very… not very difficult. This is… this works out automatically. This is inherent in the techniques which have been proposed – inherent.

„We want these woods for a long time; therefore, they are not to be destroyed. Therefore, we’re very careful and we let nothing decay in ‘em, and we re careful of what we let grow in ‘em.“ And so we monitor those two things and we get the center of the band, the MAYBE between GROWTH, and DECAY which is CONVERSATION and we’ll have the woods for a long time. That’s NULL, no action.

Now let’s look over here at this chart again, and we find the rate of change of havingness – and of course, and uh… we’ll put this plus and minus – meaning havingness and not-havingness – the rate of change of this determines… determines randomity; and that’s what randomity is. You’ve been asking for a lot of definitions for randomity: Randomity would best be described as the rate of change of havingness and not havingness. This is randomity.

That’s why 20.00 as calling 20 an action band is wrong and has been consistently wrong, uh… but it hasn’t been wrong so much as just careless. Actually, the action bands uh… come up to their heaviest competence down around 10 and 30, but why s… why strain everybody. One around 10 is fast action in terms of decay, and the one up around 30 is fast action in terms of growth and increase. Well, let’s call it all an action band. You see, we can call this that because we have our internal cycle of the grand cycle. It’s all right. We needn’t put… you’d think it was awfully funny if I kept putting into the middle of it CONSERVE.

And if you want lots of rate of change, you want lots of randomity. If you want lots of randomity, you get lots of rate of change of havingness and not-havingness. You decide, „Well, now let’s see. We’re going in… going into a lot of action. We’re going to choose out these teams to fight, and that means…“ And what are you going to get? Oh, boy! You’re going to get loss and gain on an unpredicted level – every time. Of course, you get mired down in a universe which is operating, or an area that is operating all but automatically. No-ho. Any… almost anything you do in it sets up these automatic reactions. Automaticity is really there. Automaticity is there to such a degree that you cannot regulate the interdependencies of the eight dynamics and as a result the eight dynamics and all eight dynamics are to be found in any particle of this universe, no matter what form the thing takes, you’ll find all eight. It isn’t just that you find all eight in a man.

Here we have thought, and we have start, and at the end we have stop, and in the middle of it we put CONSERVE. It… it would be… it would be foisting off on you the… the impression that there wasn’t anything we could do about it, and START and STOP and CONSERVE are all STOP. They really are, they’re all STOP. One comes from STOP. You have to go from STOP to get a START. And… and so one has to go to STOP to get a stop, and in order to CONSERVE he merely balances and that STOPs.

And that ‘all eight’ is your octahedron of filling space – just as an aside comment. Putting it into space, characteristics as well as particle characteristics, because, you see, your octahedron is not a particle characteristic at all. It’s what you would, quote, ‘fill space with’, it would be the forms which fill space.

If you get the idea of a fulcrum sitting up here and in the middle it’d be just carefully balanced like that, and we tipped it – over she’d go. But that can be tipped. The stop at the end and the start at the end, once you start that thing, boy, it’s HELL to stop.

So you’re not going to do any grand job of pulling your preclear out if he still has, and you do not know about, something that nails him down good and hard on this tone scale. What is that tone scale? As that tone scale descends it is ARC, it’s a lot of other things. Something else more important to you – it’s time. It’s one’s belief in his ability to predict the rate of change of havingness and not-havingness. And at 1.5 one has lost his ability to not-have. See, it’s an ability. He’s lost his ability to not-have, so he has to have everything, and that gives you a terrific hold, and that gives him this enormously strange attitude toward all these various things.

Do this test on a preclear someday; get him to get the idea of starting something, some preclear that doesn’t have three-dimensional vision; try it now, somebody who isn’t satisfied with the three-dimensionalism of his vision.

Now, what happens at 1.1? This person has lost his ability to have and he’s doing a terrific dispersal… pardon me, at 1.0 fear, uh… he’s doing this terrific dispersal and it’s all ‘not-have, not-have, not-have, not-have, not-have’ – see? He’s lost his ability to have.

Get a picture and get the idea of trying to start it. Now try to change it. Now, let’s stop it.

Now let’s go down tone scale, and we’ll find somebody in grief, and we find they’ve again recovered a little ability to have and not-have, and . then they went into grief on it, and we find somebody who has lost their ability again to not-have. Now what… in mock-ups. Well, how do you find this person? This person will be in the strange and wonderful manifestation of just… just not-having. This person can’t stand a ‘not-having’ and now can’t stand it because his interest is so intense in having, and the values he assigns and the penalties which could accrue to him as a result of not-having are so exaggerated that, of course, he can let go of nothing.

If you do that, occasionally you… you’ll notice something… a manifestation. What manifestation do you notice? Did anybody get that… you… you work… you work that every once in a while you’d see something happening there. Did you get anything on that? You didn’t really try to start something?

So what happens when you get somebody who is in grief on the tone scale? Why, it’s very interesting to find that all you have to do is run Step Four and there you are, he’s… he’s… you’ll cure him of it – Step Four. And that is Flow Balancing. It cures his ability to not have.

Voice: I had to push it to start it.

So all the way up the tone scale you’re just curing people of their abilities to have, alternately, and not have with mock-ups. You… you can’t upset the rate of change of this universe, but you’re not actually working with energy. Your preclear isn’t energy. He’s a capability of producing energy – a space to put it in. So as long as you work with this material on the mock-up side, he goes right on up tone scale.

LRH: Hum?

Why? You’re changing his ideas. Thinking, then, actually develops to itself – I told you a little earlier, what one devotes energy to, one has. Or what one devotes energy to, one not has. You devote energy to getting rid of something and that means you’ll have it, or devote energy to having it and that means you… it’ll… you’ll lose it.

Voice: I had to push it to start it.

Uh… you get an object in other words, which is the reverse vector of what it’s supposed to be, and what do you get here? You get a person’s future track getting solid. That sounds funny to you, but you see, in view of the fact there is no future, he’s changed his rate of change of havingness and he looks at the future and the future itself has taken on a solidity.

LRH: Oh, you have to push it to start it. We’re already into the effort band.

Now this person can’t change his postulates. Why can’t he change his postulates? They’re bogged into energy. He’s making them inside of created energy and he has… he’s actually operating in a more or less solid area when he’s thinking. He’s pushing particles around, so he can’t change his postulates, of course. And any preclear that you get ahold of is going to be unable to some degree to shift his postulates readily. And as a net result, as long as he can’t shift his postulates, he can’t, of course, change his attitude toward anything. And as long as his mind is banked in on the idea that ‘this future is solid’ over here in area ‘Z’, as long as that thing is solid, he’s tried continually to inhibit or advance the rate of change, and it didn’t shift on him. So he… he gets something solid that doesn’t change and this is a mock-up – a symbol for the future. This piece of energy, solid. It’s almost like matter after a while, and you… you’ll find this manifestation very solidly.

Well, let’s get a look at something you started once. It’ll make it a little more real to you. Get a look at something you started, and no… notice the dimensions in it. You know? Get the visio on something you started and notice the dimensions in it. How were the dimensions in that visio?… You re operating from space down when you do that. What… what dimension? Did anybody get any d… dimensions in the… in that visio of starting?

What do you do, then, with the future? If you can find the f… By the way, look around yourself and… and say, „When I predict something or try to predict something, which way do I look?“ All right, now let’s ‘see’ your future in that direction. Take a look and see if you see your future in that direction, or see what you’ve tried to see in the past, or what you normally run into when you try to see your future. And now turn it red, then turn it blue. Then turn it green. Then turn it white. And then make it get bigger. Then make it get smaller.

Voice: Get depth.

I’m just giving you the exercise.

LRH: You have got a depth? That’s all we are looking for.

Now put it behind you. Now put it into shape of a corkscrew – and that’s G-torsional future havingness now. And turn that purple, and then turn it black. And now put it down here at the corner of the lecture platform. Now tie it up into a bow and put it in a box with a lavender ribbon. Because that’s not your future. That’s a bunch of energy that you’ve gradually built up in an effort to predict the rate of change of havingness. You keep throwing toward rates of change of havingness a certain amount of energy and every single bit of this energy has the artificial and abstract mark on it: ‘future’. And it’s not future energy; it’s present time energy.

Voice: Three-dimensions in mine.

And as we look down this track here we find out that finally the area of ‘Z’ gets solid and is very easily mistaken for the area of ‘Y’, and then that gets very easily mistaken for – because you see these are all solid objects – the area of ‘X’. You see that?

LRH: You got three-dimensions?

So a psychotic, of course, becomes unable to differentiate on the rate of change of havingness because the future is solid; therefore the future is the present; and of course, the only real solidity there is is the past, so naturally it follows he must be in the past. And he is in the gradient scale of these particles which you – many of you… How many of you observed those particles, by the way? Quite a few of you, in other words. There… there is some direction there. Uh… there… there is a mass there somewhere. You just work it, just like you work any other item that you have around.

Voice: Yeah.

Uh… you… you have this… this? A lot of your preclears have this. Well, you… you’ve got this, then, a deposit. Now remember that that could be a ‘not have’ deposit. „In the future I won’t have. In the future I won’t have. In the future I won’t have. In the future I won’t have. In the f…“ and all of a sudden, why you haven’t got it. You haven’t got those particles. They’re right there but you haven’t got them. They all got a ‘future’ tag on them, and this says „This is the future and you are about to be butchered by this“ and you know you are perfectly in control of that mass of energy? That’s yours. And by deducting that mass of energy you’re doing the same thing as a mock-up, because you added that to this universe. Therefore, you’re quite at liberty to subtract it.

LRH: That’s correct. Well, that’s all right. Now look at a time when you stopped something.

Now there is where, evidently, your individual goes down tone scale and those levels on the tone scale could be mathematically adjudicated to be on the… units of energy which had become a solid deposit, with the label ‘future’ on them.

Voice: It flattens down.

How many units of energy have a solid uh… that are in this solid deposit have the label of ‘future’ on them? And you get, then finally, how many… how many uh… units… how much mass is there there. You’re down to 1.5. Boy, that 1.5, „Huh’ The future’s solid.“ He can’t afford to not have in the future so all of his thinking is being devoted not to constructive action as it goes forward, but very destructive action. And he is thinking all the time „Let’s see, I’m holding on to the present here. I’m holding on to the present. Well, I can hold on to the present“ – he’s demonstrated that to himself – therefore, all these not-haves, not-haves, not-haves, not-haves, – and anybody walks in ‘not-have’ – anybody walks up to him, he doesn’t want them. Anything else walks up to him he doesn’t want them. If he decides this, you see, he immediately takes hold of them. Reverse vectors – because he’s a great… he’s a victim of flows, so he winds up by having everything bad and everything good, and he says this is all future. And it’s solid mass.

LRH: Yeah.

So the future is solid. In Pogo, it says, „Which way is Tuesday?“ and he’s been told very, very emphatically, „Right in front of your face!“ Now that’s… that’s uh… quite pertinent.

Voice: Yeah.

Here we have, then, the ‘X, Y, Z’ where ‘Y’ would be your present time. And that’s why people begin to believe in linear time, and why their facsimiles begin to haul up and park in quote ‘present time’ because obviously the future is solid, so when you start to address the future, you’re addressing a solid object, obviously. And when you’re addressing this solid object called ‘the future’… You see, he devoted all this energy to thinking about the future, and all that energy is still there in the deposit. And the solider that gets the more it gets like present time. And you’ll get these people saying, as they st… just start down the tone scale „Well, things’ll be pretty much the same in the future as they are now.“ Conservatism. „Everything’s going to be the same as it is now. Nothing’s going to change.“

LRH: Well! Of course start is up at 40.0, and that’s space, and you’ve been in that cycle of action? Why it goes that way? We’re not dealing with anything strange or peculiar.

What you’re… you’re going to have a rough time with these people unless you know what I’m telling you now. You’re going to have a rough time getting somebody to change a little bit. You’ll be puzzled as to why this preclear won’t change. Well, this preclear won’t change because this preclear can’t change because he knows he’s sitting right there looking at the future. If you were to put a meter on it you would find out that this future was uh… so many ergs of energy, and it was a deposit, and therefore it was a piece of matter. And when he becomes quite psychotic, that piece of ‘future’ has be… he becomes neurotic, the piece of future is the present, because the present is solid. And he… he has to think somewhere in that… that band there. He starts thinking with facsimiles, as I showed you on that graph, that wheel. He thinks with facsimiles; he doesn’t think with postulates.

Uh… all right, now these flows go as directed up here – these are as directed, and these flows down here tend to go opposite to as-directed. They go opposite below 20.0 and that’s why we keep using this 20.0 as it is the NULL point between plus and minus. This is positive. The fellow makes a postulate anywhere in that area you get it carried out. And this is minus. The chances of him getting something carried out on a postulate in this area are… just reverse below 20.0.

He doesn’t think „Let’s see“; he doesn’t uh… he doesn’t even say this to himself: „Let’s see, how do I want things?“ No-no. That’s way up. He says, „There will be light. Umm, that’s nice: light. Umm-hmm, enjoy this motion for a while. Well, we can enjoy this. Let’s put some darkness in there,“ and there we go.

The fellow says, „Now, I am going to grow up and be a good buy.“ And so he winds up as a gangster. And he never quite figures out why this is.

Now when he gets quite neurotic, the present time, the ti… the energy he’s devoted to present time and trying to keep everything stable in present time, he knows he can’t predict anything out here about the future because he’s got the future right here. And the more he changes these things which are right in front of his face, the more horrible things happen to him as he goes forward into – what future has he substituted for the future? He’s made a time deposit that is a havingness, right there in front of him, and then he tries to change that instead of changing his conditions. Because the conditions which he tries to predict along all eight dynamics demonstrate to him to convince him that they are unchangeable and that they’re inevitable and that the gods do it and he doesn’t do it and nobody does it, that the rate of change, the interrelationship is, of the eight dynamics, unchangeable – by him, but is inevitable and just continues anyway.

One starts in saying, „Now, I am going to give up smoking.“ Oh, boy, how can he give up smoking, if he says he’s going to give up smoking. It’s obvious, the fellow’s a homo sapiens, isn’t he? Well, how can he ever be on a positive line? It’d be impossible for him to be.

And that is a lot of balderdash, because a fellow can go out and change his future all over the place. It just depends on how much he wants to stay in contact with the existing eight dynamics of the MEST universe, that he will monitor and reduce his ability to change the future, or how much credence he wishes to give to other individuals that he refrains from changing future. And that’s all there is to that. The future becomes a deposit and then that deposit becomes kind of solid, and it is, of course, in present time because it is a state that’s solid and unchanging – it’s a state of unchanging havingness.

So the best way in the world for this individual to go on smoking and practically ruin himself is to try to give up smoking. I think the cigarette companies have found this out empirically and actually go around trying to coax people to give up smoking.

And that goes into the past and the person has got facsimiles in restim and there he sits. And of course, he’s got a piece of energy which he… he’s got it all mixed up with energy that he says is future energy and this is past energy and it’s already happened. That’s agreement with the MEST universe.

If you had the thought „Now, I’ve got to smoke“ and would just consistently and continually tell yourself that you had to smoke and make yourself smoke and buy several brands of cigarettes and every time you found a cigarette was not in your hand be sure and put one in your hand and just make yourself have a cigarette, you’ve started to operate from way up on the band. Well, because you know, and you can operate from knowingness and you can handle flows if you know what they consist of. You don’t have to be completely supine just because they exist.

Well, there’s your… there is your dissertation on the tone scale. You can count, then, as a person goes down tone scale, that the future looks more and more unchangeable or solid to him, or inevitable, and that he can be defeated more and more and pain and penalty is more and more there, and desirability is less and less there.

As I say, you… you… the fellow out… he knows, he’s running on a reversal on colors, so he says to himself, „Well, all right. Now let’s see, I couldn’t get it when I said ‘Try to get green.’ Let’s see how… now I’ll try not to get green and I’ll get green. That’s right.“ And he does and he looks at the pretty green, and he says, „Well, I guess I can handle that.“

So up tone scale the future looks desirable because he thinks he can change the rate of havingness. And the present becomes undesirable, gradually, as he finds he isn’t doing it, and the past, then, takes on and absorbs his interest. And as he goes down tone scale you could say that the upper part of the tone scale is the next thousand years for man. The upper part of the tone scale would be the next thousand years and that would be merely the rate of change of havingness and not-havingness in the next thousand years of havingness.

Flows are the big trick and they clip right out; I mean very fast, it doesn’t take long at all for a flow to get knocked off.

And uh… there the band immediately below that would be the next dozen years. And the band below that would be this coming month. And then there’d be tomorrow. And then there’d be today. And all that’s uncertainty. What’s an uncertainty? An uncertainty is a ‘maybe’ and that’s an indecision and that’s a double flow. And what is a solid piece of matter? A matter is a solid piece of confusion and chaos, and this is double-vectored and, of course, matter itself is the biggest ‘maybe’ there is. Indecision. There is nothing travelling in one direction and there is nothing in alignment, that is chaos. An indecision is… is ‘yes’ going thataway, and ‘no’ going thataway, cancelling each other out and you don’t get any action.

So this goes on the LONG run opposite as directed. Here’s where you get, down here, more than up there; you get the… up there too. Here you act on the upper part of the band… you act to bring about a good result, and what do you get? You get the lower part of the band. What a trick.

If you want to see your preclear in a big ‘maybe’, get him something in which he’s very interested, first and foremost thing, and he’s convinced concerning his… his liability for punishment, and uh… you’ve got yourself a mighty confused fellow.

Because what starts up in the upper part of the band will finish off a cycle of action, and that goes into the lower part of the band, and then of course that goes into the opposite polarities and flows.

Well as you go down tone scale, he begins to believe that pain-pain- pain-pain-pain, pain consists of force, and the heavier bands predominate on the lower part of the tone scale. Although all bands are there, all the pain is dominant.

Decay is everything going the wrong way when it should go the right way. And don’t ever forget that from 20 down to 0.0 that is decay. That is on the way out. It… if you had to go up… straight up the MEST universe line, following the agreements of the MEST universe 100 per cent and not paralleling them with your own universe line, oh boy, would you ever dig out of this pile? I am afraid not! Why, it’s just… just… it’s just too… too booby trapped with this opposite flow deal. You say, „I wanna be clear,“ so you’ll knock off being audited. It’s just as silly as that.

Now this, then, uh… and up above that… you have to be up above a certain level, then, in order to obtain pleasure, or you have to obtain pleasure of the type that is on the band and the experience of being in the band itself or the operating of the band for its own sake, and using force in it, is, of course, pleasure too. Very odd kind of pleasure.

Well, when we look at this, we see that counter-emotion, counter-effort gets more oppositer and gets more and more negative the lower we go on it.

In other words, there’s a lot of pleasure in… in strangling somebody – 1.5 feels. 1.1 would take enormous joy out of the idea of… of uh… he might get an enormous amount of pleasure – he’d have to be interested first and have a conviction that he could do it in order to carry forward this action – in poisoning somebody very adroitly. And if they’re… this person is high on aesthetic – a 1.1 and high on aesthetic… there could be a 1.1 low on aesthetic and a 1.1 high on aesthetic and so forth, and a 1.1 kind of null and neuter. There’s where you get your randomity in personality. It’s just which bands of perception and action will they use. Why, this 1.1 would put the poison in a rose and dip the rose into a wine glass as a touching little gesture so the lover could drink it all down. 1.1 could then say „Oh, dear! What has happened to you? Does your stomach hurt?“ Typical.

Until we get up here, boy, is this up here… in… where we’ve got this line, is that positive, man that’s really positive. And down here, brother, is that really negative.

All right, then maybe you understand, then, that the past is solid and the present somewhat nebulously solid, and the future doesn’t exist for the psychotic. ‘Cause for the psychotic the past is solid, and that’s the only solidity he’s got. Why, he can’t pervade any further than his immediate self environment, and that is solid energy. He has no pervasion any further than his own energy. He can’t pervade out into any greater space than that, so he’s dragged down in space, he’s very, very centralized in himself, and there he goes. There you have it.

Up above the level of 40.0 when you say „Spit“ they spit, believe me. And down below the level of 40.0 when you say „Spit“, boy, they don’t spit, believe me. It’s a fact.

All right, your neurotic finds the present solid and every once in a while convinces himself it’s solid by pinching himself. This he considers his conviction. And he’s still enough under penalty… he’s terribly under penalty so that he can be punished if he doesn’t have this solidity in the present. And your person who is really sane, who is able to think, able to predict the rate of change or cause a rate of change of havingness or not-havingness, is, of course, handling the future. He can not only handle the past, he knows that; he can handle the present, and he can, of course, broadly handle the future, he thinks. And he’s interested is doing so, interested in handling that future.

So you go around and you tell somebody, „Okay, Scientology,“ you say, „is very fine and we’ve been working on this and we really are trying to do something about it, maybe we can do something for your back.“

Now the volume of effort that he will put into the future depends upon his amount of interest in the future. So if you have a person on… high on the tone scale who is sitting on Mount Olympus doing absolutely nothing, and a person who is fairly high on the tone scale with terrific amounts of randomity all over the shop, still high on the tone scale, but in action with regard to the future, and you’re getting a difference of what? You’re getting a difference of rate of change for the individual.

And they say, „Ha! Ha! Well! Nothing can be done for my back, of course.

Fellow on Olympus is at no different point on the tone scale. He just doesn’t have as much interest in it as the fellow who is in action. And the interest doesn’t happen to be psychotic or neurotic or anything of the sort. It doesn’t matter what you’re interested in or how much you’re interested in it; it does matter how well you’re able to handle something after you get interested in it.

You could practically have to take over ownership as you would a piece of MEST before you can do anything about it.

That is the thing that parents find wrong with children. The child will be interested in chemistry and want a chemistry set. He’s very interested in chemistry and he gets a chemistry set and he’s still very interested in chemistry, but his ability to estimate the rate of change of havingness on the thing is kind of bad. And he starts to run into a not-have, the second he gets this ‘have.’ And of course reverse vectors start to hit him and he’s no longer interested in it. Hmmm!

You get preclears down at the bottom of that scale, you practically have to slide in behind the wheel to get ‘em rolling. They’re like an automobile. They don’t even have self-starters, sometimes you have to get out and crank. But the point is that there you have your layout of… why you try to sell something, it is just fabulous that advertising works! Just FABULOUS that it works. But why does it work? Did you ever ask yourself that: „Why does advertising work?“ It’s just one thing in the advertising sign that works; you could put in a big dissertation, you could say, „Buick cars are mounted on a… on a something or other, and uh… Jaguars uh… have so much pounds per horsepower and they’re made out of so on, and differentials, and they drive at such-and-such a speed. And they do this and they do that and so on, and you could have this nice little dissertation… on print. Nobody’d give a damn whether they owned one or not. But if you put a picture of one that’s an aesthetic, and the higher you go and the tinier you get on the wave length, the less oppositeness of reaction you get. So aesthetic show a tendency to come out in the pure rather than in the negative, and they have much less negative response contact than positive. So if you do something very aesthetically you’re more liable to get some sort of an agreement on the thing.

Well, the parents say, well, he ought to continue and be constant in their interest. And the reason they ought to do so is because parents don’t change, do they?

If people in this field were all to dress up in white gowns with purple sandals and we had a great big monastery sitting on top of a hill someplace and olive groves and all that sort of thing everybody’d go and they’d say, „That’s… that’s where Scientology is. That’s right,“ and so on. It’d just be fine. „Well, that is one of those Scientologists now. Look at their gowns and so on.“ „Now, don’t get too close to him, he is liable to put a curse on you.’ And uh… that’s right; that’s the way it’d roll; but there’s the aesthetic.

And they consider this a great virtue. Unchangingness is NOT a virtue, And you start to hit a society and change it too often in the field of objects, and it will rebel. But uh… you can change objects all over the place.

As a matter of fact, it’s well within your choice to know about that.

Some of the old-time pilots used to change objects from coast to coast and around the world and that sort of thing, and everybody was tremendously, vastly interested. Why? Well, the rate of change was very fast. And it was above their level of rate of change, and somebody seemed to be able to get rid of this, and away with this rate of change, so they got very interested in it. Why? Well, they… they wanted a higher rate of change themselves, but they didn’t dare have a r… higher rate of change themselves. So they got very interested in that line.

As opposed to the aesthetic… as opposed to the aesthetic is another answer, and that’s to use the effort band. „Oh, uh… you uh… you don’t like Scientology, huh?“ Pow!

Well, your old-time pilot could do that, but let’s take somebody who starts changing very close to the static level. I… I’ve been shifting things around close to the static level like mad, by just the change of growth. Of course, an idea doesn’t grow; you just get more and more certain on a certain level and it can be associated with rate of changes of havingness and not havingness more closely. And the first thing you know, you can either exist in the static level or you can exist in the energy flow level – either way. People get upset because you change ideas; in that level they get more upset, about it. They really get upset because they’re looking at a static. They… they’ve got a ghosty idea that there must be a static there, ‘cause it’s theta, isn’t it? And it’s probably motionless. That’s right; it’s motionless.

But have you got any reason in this lower band here? You know, there are probably not more… there are probably not more than 30,000 people at that in the United States who could probably eat this stuff up. Are you aware of that fact? That’s very strange for me to say that. Go ahead and feel lonesome. You haven’t taken a good look in a long time… taken a look at your immediate circle of friends, something like that.

But when it enters into the field of energy, it demonstrates the fact that it’s not motionless and that there’s a motion connected with it. They get very confused.

The truth of the matter is… the truth is that the intellectuals of the entire world, by a survey which was rather competently done, by the way, are sort of plotted in a pyramid of what are the IQ’s of people on earth? This poor guy who gets out of college and decides he has to work hard to succeed, what a boob! He doesn’t have to work at all to succeed. There’s just nothing to it. He can talk, can’t he? I mean, he can say, „Please pass the butter,“ can’t he? He can… he knows how to wear a tie and a coat, doesn’t he? He’s set. He’s the upper crust. He is! That’s no kidding.

The one thing you’re not supposed to do is change your mind. You can change almost anything else, but don’t change your mind, for God’s sakes! You’ll find that in more banks!

He’s… regardless of what state he’s supposed to be in, a survey of all of this demonstrated that at any one time on earth there were not more than about 10,000 people of a caliber that was sufficient to do a little steering or leading. And that wasn’t a very high IQ; and it doesn’t flatter you very much. It isn’t up there around Army Alpha 212, as you’d think it is; not at all. There is only about 10,000 of them really.

Now, your tone scale, then, is also an estimation of how long it’s going to take to change the future estimates of this individual. Of course, the lower on the tone scale, the longer it’s going to take. Why? You take the same process, you’re getting more and more factors entering into it which are varying the matter involved. The energy has turned into matter, to a large extent, and there we have it.

And below that level you have something in the neighborhood of about 100,000 or 150,000, 200,000 people who have a competence of assimilation. That’s about all.

So, here, then, is perhaps a better understanding of what you’re looking at when you look at the state of a preclear. He’s trying to hold himself up by being interested in one dynamic maybe, or another dynamic. He isn’t interested broadly in all the dynamics. You can lead him with interest into almost anything. You can! You can lead anything. You can lead nations to destruction. You can lead planets to hell and back with the loopiest subject matter imaginable so long as an interest level is maintained.

You can count then on those people directing others or leading them. And if you’re very experienced on it and you really did a good job, it’s sort of like… I don’t know… like patting kids on the head. I’m not being patronizing. I mean that’s the successful attitude when it comes to those people. And we get the share of those in the United States, and we carve that down, we find out a handful, just a handful of people in the United States supported by another triple handful of people in the United States out of 150 millions.

Let’s take sound solid subject matter which is a very tight, close evaluation of the situation, and subtract the interest from it. Let’s not make it colorful. Then your people who are really spinny don’t pay any attention to it. Why? Well, they haven’t got any interest in it because they can’t associate that with something else, and they can only identify. And they can obey force and that’s about all.

And if you have a savage enough truth, or a beautiful enough truth, they can go through, but don’t ever try to get a reasonable enough truth, because you won’t ever talk to reason.

So, you can walk straight through a society and as long as you do not introduce anything interesting in the material, you can tear it to pieces. But you introduce something like ‘74 trillion years old’, some magazine pick it up. It’s interesting – it becomes interesting. That’s truth. That’ll go around. People will begin to wonder, „Well, that’s nonsense!“ or „How’s this?“ but they wonder why Time’s printing it and so on, and get upset about this. You’ve introduced a level of interest.

If, perhaps, you talked to people, demonstrated to them, worked with them very hard and showed them very hard over a long period of time, quite convincing and demonstrated a lot to them, you would appeal to them on a level of reason. But my God, do you know what you would have done if you did that? What you would have done is something very interesting; by education you would’ve kicked ‘em upscale. The weapon was in your own hands at the time you were talking. By that, I mean you’ve got a reasonability.

Well, from that point on it can start to get uh… a little bit hectic because your interest level starts increasing. Well, boy, when interest level starts to increase, you had better be – as I once was not – very well located on a static as far as ideas are concerned. „You do so forth-and-so-and-so.“ In other words, the non-motion thing called an idea shouldn’t be subject too much to change. And so you ought to have a good, broad, workable, precise body of knowledge which sits there and will sit there and which will endure and which is not subject to misinterpretation, because why? It has a workable, routine, easily understood application.

Now, let’s… let’s… let’s not be snide or put this into the category of „we’re all so smart and they’re all so dumb.“ I’m telling you something that’s very nakedly true; that has a workability as I have worked it out.

And the second you do this, then if you start stirring up interest in the society at large, interest, and you’ve got a static idea that society can shift. When I can say that a world can be led to hell and back with interest, you can package anything, no matter what garbage – anything – and cloak it in certain tones and it will be bought – without question!

We have when we get down to this business… If you’re trying to tell people on the standpoint of reason… A Critique of Pure Reason would be a critique of the minus sign down here on this chart, you’ve got a negative flow. So, when you try to tell people, „Look, we know something; it’ll make you a lot happier and better, and you can climb out of this mess.“ You’re just a handful. Most of you’ve been pitching in this league for a couple of years. Strange, isn’t it? It’s strange you re not an auditorium full. You’ll never be a auditorium full. There aren’t that many. That’s all there is to it – there just aren’t.’

Scholarly language is simply a method of toning up straight corn. People buy in the field of sciences, not knowledge or truth, they buy tone scale. And they feel that science should be at 3.0 on the tone scale. There is just that much estimation of the rate of change of havingness. „And whereas we don’t take any real responsibility for this, it has occasionally been stated and so on…“ They buy tone scale.

You could go out and have vases fly off the immediate part of the stage and ‘pow’ them for people. You can also dress up Annie Oakley in a beautiful white hat with a beautiful cowboy skirt and have her stand in the saddle and ride around the arena and do the same thing with a shotgun and get the same crowd. You think I’m kidding you? Well, it’s the same line.

The… is… this is, perhaps, not as… as completely hilarious to anybody as it is to a writer. A writer can look at this and it isn’t something that amazes him. He’s been doing this for a long time. „How does Professor Blink talk in the story?“ The writer knows. He establishes tone scales all over the place, up and down and back and forth and around and around. He has to, to have any randomity of characterization. He has to characterize people as people think they know people. A writer doesn’t write about how people are; he writes about how people think people ought to be when they are written about.

So therefore you have two levels of appeal which are quite direct and quite direct indeed is you just go ahead and you work; you don’t try to tell anybody anything beyond perhaps you intimate to them once in a while that you might be able to do something for them. But you could intimate that for God sakes on a… on an aesthetic, an aesthetic or a completely false sympathy line. „Oh, you poor fellow.“ He… he won’t miss the irony. I mean, he… he won’t hit it. He doesn’t know, You just… you just assign all knowingness to everybody around you and you’ll get in trouble, because they’re not all knowing. You go down… you’re not gonna put this postulate into the line, you are not going to say uh…, „Well, you uh… here you are uh… you know all about this, and you know that sympathy could kill a man without half trying.“ Oh, no! He wouldn’t believe it!

Dialogue is not what people say, but the things people think people should say when written about. Highly conditional. And so we could get out a book under some guise by just – on any subject under the sun, any subject – and if it were properly written on the right level of the tone scale, believe me it could become THE tome on the subject. All you’d have to do is study style.

„Yeah, I’ve seen these sympathetic guys,“ he’d say and so on, and uh… „Yeah,“ and so on and so on. „And, but you know, I do get awfully tired,“ he’ll say. „Gimme. Gimme. Gimme some more… gimme some more cohesiveness of matter so that I can solidify further and go down a little bit further on the tone scale.“ He will.

What the hell has an aesthetic got doing, walking in on knowledge? Beware of knowledge which is too well-dressed in an aesthetic. Knowledge is that thing from which you should be able to deduce, acquire and abandon aesthetics. If you are in a high level of truth, you can acquire or jettison aesthetics by the skillions, because to that interest may be added. But if you are in an aesthetic alone and you find there nothing but an aesthetic? ‘Cause what is a piece of writing but an aesthetic? Even… even though it appears in the ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA it has, or not has, a certain aesthetic balance.

And you just sit there and you’d say, „You poor fellow. Yes, I’m… I’m sure of that.“

Do you know that there’s enormous room in this world for a good data encyclopedia? „How do you make penicillin? You make penicillin by…“ Not… not uh… uh… „in the early days of chemical research, it was suspected that, when certain bacteria were bacteriarized, they were so bacteriarized that the bacteriological bacteriazation took place almost instantaneously. But later on they found out they could drag it out a bit. And Professor Wumph said, although this is controverted by Professor Battleboof, that the earlier suppositions regarding this subject were not supported by the ancient Greek. Of course, when we have studied more deeply into this subject…“ You poor boob! You couldn’t understand this subject. We have to interpret it for you, you boob! Uh… that’s not in there in print. That’s just there. Uh… when you get through you say, „How the hell do you make this stuff?!“

And that tells you that way up there at the top of the tone scale, the first pretense is that it’s not all pretense, and that’s the first thing a fellow learns! The first pretense is to pretend that it’s not all pretense.

That used to torture me because I was manufacturing the wherewithal and the havingness in this society necessary to the production of Dianetics and Scientology and the study of the mind. There wasn’t anybody else going to throw any money into this. I had to throw money into this, so I made the money to throw it into it.

A guy starts selling himself then and selling himself and selling himself. You cannot have a… a game unless you pretend there’s a game! And then if you say, „The game is serious,“ and „The game is all,“ and „We’re not pretending anymore, and therefore this is not a game,“ oh, boy, how grim can we get?

Well, I ca… you can always make money. That… that’s the easiest stuff in the world to make. Sometimes you get a little bit short. For a few weeks, why, you’re chewing shoe leather or something uh… like Charlie Chaplain did when he ate his shoe, and so on. But uh… what the score is in any one of these aesthetics is that there’s either data or there’s an aesthetic.

Now, you say, „We have to be absolutely truthful and sincere; and SINCERITY is the main thing, and TRUTHFULNESS is the main thing, and don’t lie to anybody, and never daa… and you’ll get ahead.“ You… brother, you sure will. You’ll get ahead right on that cycle of action right towards zero.

Now if you simply sit there – you’re not trying to teach Scientology, you’re not trying to tell anybody about Scientology – but you are merely using Scientology either to put an industry on its feet or put preclears together, your rate of change of havingness and not-havingness to a large degree depends upon your aesthetic, not the exposition of your knowledge.

Did you notice one day, I think it was – where is he? Yeah, there he is. Yeah, he told me up here on the stand, he couldn’t tell me a lie! Well, that isn’t because of me; it’s just because he’s got to believe that… that the MEST universe is that way. Now, you’ll find pcs are like this. It’s a TRAP not being able to prevaricate. You don’t have to have a reason to prevaricate. It’s when people have to have a reason to prevaricate that it becomes lying. Before that time it’s just ornamentin’.

Your havingness and not-havingness, then, is changed by the interest level which is elicited towards you, and interest is invited by aesthetics, not by knowledge.

You say, „You know, I was downtown the other day, and I… there’s this yellow taxi there, and I started to step into this yellow taxi and I’ll be a son of a gun if there wasn’t a big ape sitting in the back with the smuggest grin. I closed the door and walked on down the street.“ This makes life more colorful.

That’s why there are so few who will ever learn this subject. Really, there are very few out of all the beings there are.

You would be surprised what it would do for you if you suddenly threw one of those in every once in a while. The finest way in the world people can put you up tone scale is to find out that you’re lying. Yeah, you go around being afraid you’ll be found out you are lying.

You can take this knowledge – if you know this knowledge well, you do not have to parade this knowledge. You can teach people the knowledge. If you do that, for God’s sakes, just teach ‘em data more or less like I do. The amount of interest that I’ve put into this is very minor – very minor really. Make a wisecrack once in a while, throw some randomity in – don’t do very… very much. Give ‘em data – tha… that’s what’s important if you’re teaching.

Uh… I made a preclear one day. I just gave him one process only; every once in a while I’ll hand out a process to some other preclear that I don’t want to process very long, I just give him a couple of straightwire questions, I have only got maybe two minutes, and I say, „Now, look. You say – what’s your trouble? Oh, well, now look. I want you to go out and tell somebody a lie so they will find out that you are lying… that you were lying. And then do that several times and uh… tell it in such a way that they can discover you’re lying.“

But if you’re practicing, don’t give anybody any data at all. They say, „I hear that you think that so-and-so.“

And this guy says, „Oh, no.“

And you say, „You do? Well, there’s no accounting for people, what they hear. Now people,“ then you look at them searchingly, „people who have a great thirst for beauty and love and that sort of thing, often invite into themselves information of a kind which is… they’re afraid will be true. And do you know that they will often hold to themselves data that… for fear other people will be hurt by it?“

I said, Well, go ahead, do that.“

And the patient will look at you and say, „That’s sweet!“

„I’ll do it if you say so.“

You… you look into this preclear’s eyes and say, „Yes, you… you’ve had a thirst for human love, haven’t you?“ I mean, you talk about obvious data. They jus… just take this tone scale and take a look at the girl. This tone scale is lying here under the blotter and you can only see in that direction, see. And it says… it says, „Apathy: Relatively uncontrolled anxi…“ You wouldn’t be able to talk to her uh… too much. Uh… here: „Capable of destructive action, psychotic, depository.“ „Oh, no. Let’s get up higher. „Boredom: Relatively inactive but capable of action.“ She comes in, boy, is she a bored… a bored character. And uh… yet so-and-so and so-and-so. It’s right cr… across the line. Put the aesthetic band on this thing: „Boredom: Normal, neurotic, halfway between, occasionally ill, susceptible to usual diseases.“

Okay, now we’re all set, and he went out and he did it and it cracked his case of course. He was so afraid people would find out the truth, that is to say that he was lying, that he wouldn’t lie, and so he had to assign everything as truth and he was having a really rough time with the whole deal. All he had to do was tell someone a lie so that they’d find it out, and then of course, what did he expect would happen? He… the will… walls would sort of start to creak you see, and he could brace himself because this person was bound to do what? Criticize him. Criticizing, when they do criticism artistically, they do it with a club. So he’s afraid of being hurt! Afraid of having his space collapsed around him, and afraid of becoming matter. And therefore he’s afraid of criticism because he has it identified with force! Which it is! Criticism is the shadow of force! And it… the threat of force. „Well, I want to criticize you because I wouldn’t want you to get into a lot of trouble doing something or other. And I don’t mean to be critical of your driving, but if someday…“ They act like they’re trying to prevent you from being hurt all the time, or being upset, or losing heavily, and that’s the reason for criticism, isn’t it? Only, what they’re really doing is they don’t for a moment suppose that they are really helping you. They really don’t suppose this. They’re just indulging themselves one way or the other, a little pretense going on. The next thing you know why they’ve got you practically destroyed. If you’re afraid of being hurt physically, you’ll be afraid of being criticized.

„Well, you’ve… you’ve often regarded yourself, I am sure, as average in health, haven’t you?“

The fellow goes out and he tells somebody. He says, „Well, I uh… just saw your wife uh… I just saw your wife outside the door… hm…“ And the guy rushes down to find out what his wife’s doing there; he comes back and the whole project was a failure because the fellow figured it was a practical joke and they’re allowable. And this fellow had to really get down and figure quite a bit to find out finally how to tell a lie so that he would be found out. And it occupied his mind so much, he didn’t have any time to think about his neurosis or anything, and he finally made the grade – he finally made the grade. He called up and said that a bill had been paid, and of course that could be found out. And he said it very straight facedly and he kept insisting from there on the bill had been paid. And he insisted that the check was there and it had arrived, that he had the receipt, and he just went on with a complete show about the bill being paid fully expecting any moment to go mad himself and discover that he didn’t know whether it had been paid or not! And what do you know, his level of certainty on the fact he was lying got better and better and better, and he began to enjoy it and so forth, so he started calling up all sorts of people and telling them he had paid them. And his credit got much better! Anybody’d loan him money.

„Yes – yes I have!“

If you want to get a horrible reputation and get killed, you just go around sincerely and honestly helping people. If you want to know who’s helping people in this world go around and find out who’s just on the verge of being killed. You ought to look it over. It’s fascinating! This of course reverse vector.

„Uh… and really your… your interest in life has vacillated to a large degree between indifference and boredom, hasn’t it?“

Well, all of this adds up to the fact that if you go around asking a society for a license to survive, and you keep on telling them „Now, look, you’re so-and-so and so-and-so, and we’ve got a whole track. And you’ve really lived before and we’re really’d be amazed about the whole thing and so on and so on and so on and so on and so on yowl-yowl-yowl-yowl-yowl-yawl.“ Oh no, not under any circumstances, please, please, please for my sake don’t do that.

„Well, that’s… that’s right.“

I… I have tried to do what I could in this subject and… and tried to square it around. I am actually working from a fairly high level on… on the operational end, I expect to see it go right but I want to see it applied. Ap… applied here to homo sapiens pretty well ‘cause I… I know he can be dug out, but you can’t dig him out on a cross flow. No sir.’ ‘Cause every time you pull him up, he’s going to go down. He’s… you are going to pull him up one inch, he’s going to go down six inches. That’s because he is su… so sure that a lie is terrible, and that pretense is the most horrible thing; he’s got to have the truth, and the only truth he’ll assume is that truth which is fed to him on his level of the tone band, which is KILL, FEAR, DIE, FADE, OBEY. Great, big code he has to run on. So that’s the truth he buys. And you will have to sell him on a reverse vector by not selling him at all.

„Yes, I know. I know it very well that… how this thing is, ‘cause life isn’t very interesting, when it really comes down to that. One can certainly agree on that – it’s terribly uninteresting. It’s a terrible bore. Awful bore, isn’t it? Dreadful.“

You go around and say to him… say to him, „Now, this Scientology is really all right.“ But I tell you, I can just see some of you now sitting in a… in a… in a… a rather arty uh… in a rather arty living room, in some studio apartment or something of this sort, talking to these two people… and they’re… they’re a… an attorney and his wife or something like that, and they’re nice people and they have always looked bright to you and uh… I can see these people, and uh… they are saying, „But that’s perfectly incredible! It’s mysticism. I never thought you were a mystic or that you go in for that sort of thing.“

And they say, „Boy, you know this guy’s right in there pitching with me.“ He just looks across and you’re agreeing with him.

I can just see you earnestly and pleadingly say… saying, „Please give me a license to survive. Please give me a license to survive. Please.“

„Now you… you’ve felt this withdrawal from people for some time. haven’t you?“

They mention, „I hear you mixed up with that new cult.“

„How’d you know I withdrew from…?“ „Well…“ „I really don’t, you know. It’s just that they bore me.“

You tell ‘em, „It is the biggest cult. It’s the biggest cult in the world today. And uh… it’s very funny because you see it doesn’t work.“

„Well, that’s right. But people are very uninteresting. One can’t be blamed for that, can one?“

And the fellow says, „What?“

„No, no!“

And you say… and you say, „It’s very funny but Scientology just doesn’t work. That’s all.“

Uh… now we’ll go along here… „Uh… the routine ordinary humdrum life that one leads is, of course, a good safeguard against all this.“

And if you want to tell him anything… you want to s… hang it on somebody and say it’s somebody’s fault, you just tell ‘em, „If Ron heard me tell you that it would help your back, he would probably be very upset. But confidently the truth of the matter is it will.“ If you wanna blame somebody, the name’s yours. My name anyhow. But there’s… there is your… your answer.

„Yes, I’ve found it so.“

Now, don’t be surprised (I probably shouldn’t put this on the tape) but don’t be surprised if you were to find… you were to find all sorts of people springing up around insisting „It’s bad! It works!“ And so, now don’t… don’t be too amazed.

Agreement, agreement, agreement… Let’s just go right across the boards here and we find out that uh… „Disinterest in procreation; vague tolerance of children.“ Huh! In other words, you can just make it up – „Insincere, careless of facts.“ Well, what do you know? You’re talking to a 2.5. Careless of facts.

But don’t you be amazed if you get a level of ostracism on the basis of trying to plead its cause or case; it doesn’t need a case pled. Nobody is going to be able to execute it; it can’t be shot, nothing can happen to it, that is the truth. It has the thickest armour plate in the world, zero space, it’s an idea. There’s no reason in your being uh… defensive about it in any category and the truth of the matter is that if you tried hard, you could actually sell people on Scientology, just… they would just get squirrelly if you never talked any other way than „it didn’t work.“ Just look at them, „It doesn’t work.“ Not come-on… not as a come-on so they’ll say… never seize on to it so that it becomes a come-on.

You say, „Well, the appointment began at 2:30“ – it didn’t. The appointment began at 3:15. They’ll say, „All right, it began at 2:30,“ – doesn’t matter – „ and it continued until 5:30“ – they’re not interested in anything. And these people, of course, are very easy to take things away from so you simply say, „Well, that fee for this session now…“ patting them sympathetically on the hand a little bit, but not as sympathetically as you’d pat somebody way, way down tone scale here, see. You really pat somebody down around… pat a 1.5 on the hand sympathetically some time. They just go „Slurp“; they’re Just people who have driven away every possible thing that they really want, and you show them a little bit of sympathy „Well, It’s pretty rough, carrying the world on your back kind of, you know? And getting things along and trying to get people to do things. Overcoming these various inertias and so on. That’s pretty rough. Yeah.“

„I’m not supposed to tell you that this’ll fix up your back.“ „It probably wouldn’t. It very often KILLS people! Do you know, confidentially, I don’t know why I got mixed up in this because I’ve never been in quite a cold-blooded atmosphere, but do you know that the Hubbard Foundation at 237 North 16th Street there is right next door to a…“ You can tell them, „Of course, I don’t mean to infer that anybody took that address next to that mortuary on purpose.“ „And don’t get wrong the impression I was trying… I was trying not to tell you that.“ And if you just follow that up real close and so forth and then say, „Of course I’m kidding you.“ This will set their teeth on edge. Oh-ohh!

Oh, boy! That guy will just empty out his soul in great big coal buckets. Why you…

Now if somebody says… somebody says to you… somebody says to you „Oh, you are a theta clear, huh? You… I understand you’re a theta clear that’s… and so on. Well, why don’t you do so-and-so and so-and-so and prove this!“

But you’re not interested in that to any great degree. But is… what is the aesthetic? The aesthetic isn’t knowledge, it’s putting it to use. And it’s the amount of interest which we’ll be given to you because you know. And that’s about all there is to it.

You could say, „Who told you I was a theta clear? I want to know’. Was it some member of the… of the uh… Foundation, somebody like that? Was it another auditor? It wasn’t another auditor, was it? TELL ME!!“ As though you’d just been insulted beyond insult, just reverse your emotional vector on the whole deal, and they’ll have terrific reasons then to believe why they’ve got to be scared to death of you.

When doing mock-ups, you find in following this material along and in matching up the interest in aesthetics of people, and keeping them marching on up that your cases wall keep advancing.

Now, another thing in order to… in view of the fact that this information is absolutely wide-open, it obviously can’t be any good. Why, if I were you, I’d fix up a dummy, and take a book or something of the sort and write on the face of it THE BLACK BOOK OF SCIENTOLOGY or something of the sort and then band it very tightly so it’s hard to open and people… instead of… people come around, they want to have a s… a snide smile on their face, something like that because of what you’re doing… make a point of having it on the desk and suddenly kicking it into the desk drawer and slam the desk door real quick. And say, „Hello, Joe!“ Do it with a perfectly straight face. And he’ll feel sort of creepy about the whole thing. The reason he will feel creepy is a very, very good reason why he’ll feel creepy. There’s a terrific reason why; is because he basically knows that anybody that starts on this track becomes excessively dangerous. That’s true.’ It doesn’t matter how stupid he’s acting, there is some kind of an echoing memory lost back of all that automaticity that’s saying, „Oh boy, no, no, no. I was in an area once, there was a thetan in the area, and I killed this deer in this forest, and oh, lord, that was the horriblest past death I think I have.“ And he’ll be saying, „Of course, there is no such thing.“ It’s not true; thetans are bad people to have around if they’re bad people.

This chart can help you and I hope this data about Time helps you an awful lot, because it’s going to help an awful lot of people if you use it. Let’s take a break.

Now, furthermore, you don’t take any responsibility for… for. uh… anything that you own beyond the level of just having it all anyway. I mean there’s no… no sense in going around wondering whether or not you have responsibility, don’t have responsibility or whether you took responsibility or didn’t take respons… This is pointless, this… you’re thinking about BLAME if you are doing that.

No, you… you just… do you want to know how to take responsibility for everything? Is go out someday and go on up to… go on up to the top of one of the taller buildings or something of the sort or get out of your head and take a look at the town. And uh… just see how your town is coming out here, „Well, I guess they’re doing all right now. Okay.“ Just make a postulate like that once in a while. Very funny! You probably come down after that, walk ten feet down in line and have some man ask you if he can spit in the sidewalk.

Now, I would like to point out really the fact of trying to tell people about Scientology; there is… there are some texts, the Professional Course Texts, and so forth; the British edition of SELF ANALYSIS will be available and that’s… and that says Dianetics, I know; SELF ANALYSIS IN DIANETICS is the title of it. Yeah, but it’s fine; it’ll do ‘em a lot of good; it won’t worry ‘em any. And I had it read by several people and, boy, were they stupid people I picked. I picked the most stupid people I could pick, and I wrote that and rewrote that text on the description of it until every one of ‘em knew what I was talking about and agreed with it, and they worked fine. And that’s right; that’s a good book. And you go around the place and you’ll say, „Well, I found out more from that book than any other book.“ And we’re trying to make that book available to auditors cheap so they don’t have to do a lot of explaining. And don’t even bother to explain this.

„What is the business about energy units, and you getting out of your head and everything else?“

And you say, „Who’s been telling you about that?“

And they say, „Oh, it was all over the place. It was in… it was in LOSS OF TIME magazine and…“

And you say, „Well, it was in that… but you… nobody has been talking to you about it, have they?“

And they say, „N… no.“

And you say, „You’re sure?“

„No.“

„Well, all right.“ Just close the conversation. And then don’t be so anxious to see a reaction.

The only reason a guy can’t pull this stuff off smoothly is because he is so anxious to see a reaction on the part of other people. And their anxiety is not to show one. You let them go home and sweat. They sweat.

You have… you have yourself a situation where you… you just uh… rush the game like a poker player. I mean, he’s… he’s too anxious to find out what the other fellow’s cards are he just can’t wait! Oh, no, that’s a bad way to play a game.

That person, just uh… they toss it off and they appear to be very indifferent about it, and if you were to look inside their heads you’d see this… this festering seething mass; that’s their concern about this whole thing, and they’re sitting there saying blandly, „Would you have another cup of tea, my dear.“ And uh… they’re very calm about this whole thing. They’re not.

If you see somebody nailed to the top of the Empire State Building flagpost with a huge beautiful silken banner flopping down around the inert body or something like that, why, don’t be too surprised or amazed; it’ll be in a good cause; he was a member of The Better Dead Club or something of the sort, but the banner will… would say, „Scientology doesn’t work.“ And that would… that would be the byword.

And that is, by the way, what I tell people. They say, „Oh, you’ve got a pitch going“ or something like that.

„No! No!“ I say, „I haven’t got a pitch going or anything like that.“ Don’t let them them put it in that line. „It is just the fact that you have got to have something around that doesn’t function at all.“ And I always throw this stuff up. And they start looking at rather peculiarly. You say, „Well, it doesn’t work! It really doesn’t. There’s no use getting upset about it; it doesn’t.“

And the guys say, „Ahhhhhhhhhhh. Bad stuff.“

So I advice to you very well that line of tactic because you’ll knock a lot of guys in the head.

Once in a while when you feel yourself being trapped, remember that chart and just reverse the vector on somebody; it works really every time, even if you don’t see the reaction instantly.

Let’s take a break.