I want to talk to you today about the parts of man. It's quite important for you to know the divisions, subdivisions of man, and also, be important for you to know how he got that way.

I want to talk to you today about the parts of man. It's quite important for you to know the divisions, subdivisions of man, and also, be important for you to know how he got that way.

So actually, this talk today consists of the parts of man, and also overt acts and motivators.

So actually, this talk today consists of the parts of man, and also overt acts and motivators.

You wonder why these two could possibly come together this way. Well, they both do — so that this is the parts of man as understood through R2-61 and R2-62.

You wonder why these two could possibly come together this way. Well, they both do — so that this is the parts of man as understood through R2-61 and R2-62.

Man consists of four, distinct, separate parts. Although they are all related to each other, they are as distinctly separate as a stove is from the roof and a backyard is from the city jail.

Man consists of four, distinct, separate parts. Although they are all related to each other, they are as distinctly separate as a stove is from the roof and a backyard is from the city jail.

The whole theory of psychotherapy fell down and went boom the moment we discovered that we were not treating the first dynamic when we were running engrams. Psychotherapy went by the boards. It died. It turned up its heels, and it has now even ceased to give an odor. Except in the newspapers, which report the new miracle cures, such as that one reported today, whereby they give somebody an electric shock, play them jazz, give them an-other shock and play them jazz — I think that, more or less, is the theory of it — and then turn them loose into a jukebox society. They implant an engram.

The whole theory of psychotherapy fell down and went boom the moment we discovered that we were not treating the first dynamic when we were running engrams. Psychotherapy went by the boards. It died. It turned up its heels, and it has now even ceased to give an odor. Except in the newspapers, which report the new miracle cures, such as that one reported today, whereby they give somebody an electric shock, play them jazz, give them an-other shock and play them jazz — I think that, more or less, is the theory of it — and then turn them loose into a jukebox society. They implant an engram.

Well, this actually isn't even odorous. It's simply idiotic. Actually, there seem to be more than four parts. There are the four parts that we know about, and then there is the monkey kingdom. And this anthropoidal, atavistic tendency on the part of psychiatry is of no concern of ours whatsoever.

Well, this actually isn't even odorous. It's simply idiotic. Actually, there seem to be more than four parts. There are the four parts that we know about, and then there is the monkey kingdom. And this anthropoidal, atavistic tendency on the part of psychiatry is of no concern of ours whatsoever.

Psychiatry is doing something, we're not quite sure what, but I asked a psychiatrist once if he ever made anybody well, and he looked very surprised. This was not even vaguely part of his operating plan.

Psychiatry is doing something, we're not quite sure what, but I asked a psychiatrist once if he ever made anybody well, and he looked very surprised. This was not even vaguely part of his operating plan.

And you are going to be very shocked someday when you discover this yourself — that psychiatry is not supposed to make anybody well; psychiatry treats the insane toward no goal.

And you are going to be very shocked someday when you discover this yourself — that psychiatry is not supposed to make anybody well; psychiatry treats the insane toward no goal.

And you think that I am just kidding you, I'm just exaggerating that that's the case.

And you think that I am just kidding you, I'm just exaggerating that that's the case.

So, psychotherapy is in the doldrums and always has been, and until Dianetics came along, there didn't seem to be much hope for it.

So, psychotherapy is in the doldrums and always has been, and until Dianetics came along, there didn't seem to be much hope for it.

Dianetics covers the first four dynamics, and the fact of the matter is, it understands by the first dynamic, primarily — and originally understood by the first dynamic — what we now call Homo sapiens.

Dianetics covers the first four dynamics, and the fact of the matter is, it understands by the first dynamic, primarily — and originally understood by the first dynamic — what we now call Homo sapiens.

When we say first dynamic, we mean all these four parts. But just as you can take any dynamic and split it up into more dynamics, so you can take this first dynamic and split it down into these parts.

When we say first dynamic, we mean all these four parts. But just as you can take any dynamic and split it up into more dynamics, so you can take this first dynamic and split it down into these parts.

But this is quite important. When you have done so — when you have done so, and split all this down — you discover that you were treating the third dynamic when you thought you were treating the first dynamic. You follow me?

But this is quite important. When you have done so — when you have done so, and split all this down — you discover that you were treating the third dynamic when you thought you were treating the first dynamic. You follow me?

In other words, if we went ahead and continued in this error, we would be way downstairs from the truth and we would never climb upstairs to it.

In other words, if we went ahead and continued in this error, we would be way downstairs from the truth and we would never climb upstairs to it.

In Dianetics, we talked very distinctly about the awareness of awareness unit. It's in Book One, you see. And we talk about the Dianetic Clear.

In Dianetics, we talked very distinctly about the awareness of awareness unit. It's in Book One, you see. And we talk about the Dianetic Clear.

Well, if you read Book One you will discover that a Dianetic Clear could be nothing but just, only, singly, by itself (and it's this thing called "absolute Clear"), the awareness of awareness unit with no other parts.

Well, if you read Book One you will discover that a Dianetic Clear could be nothing but just, only, singly, by itself (and it's this thing called "absolute Clear"), the awareness of awareness unit with no other parts.

Remember, we were trying to rub out all the engrams. And toward the end of 1951, if you read some of my papers of that time, you'll discover that the erasure of all engrams would, of course, have resulted completely and utterly in the demolishment of the body, you see. So, this is a real curious thing. That's true. It would have, if you carried this reductio ad absurdum, simply erased every engram which a person had.

Remember, we were trying to rub out all the engrams. And toward the end of 1951, if you read some of my papers of that time, you'll discover that the erasure of all engrams would, of course, have resulted completely and utterly in the demolishment of the body, you see. So, this is a real curious thing. That's true. It would have, if you carried this reductio ad absurdum, simply erased every engram which a person had.

So we were treating, however, in Book One, this lifetime. Now, you could erase the engrams of this lifetime and you would make somebody far better off than before, you see? You could take just the engrams — and remember that an engram is a moment of pain and unconsciousness.

So we were treating, however, in Book One, this lifetime. Now, you could erase the engrams of this lifetime and you would make somebody far better off than before, you see? You could take just the engrams — and remember that an engram is a moment of pain and unconsciousness.

I beg your pardon. I misstated something. If you erased all the facsimiles of the whole track, the body would be gone. And all we essayed to do was simply erase these moments of pain and unconsciousness, and leave the rest of the facsimiles. You see that? So that would have made a relative Clear, just as you had a computing-machine clear, you know — a lot of held-down fives, and you'd clear these, and the fellow operates better.

I beg your pardon. I misstated something. If you erased all the facsimiles of the whole track, the body would be gone. And all we essayed to do was simply erase these moments of pain and unconsciousness, and leave the rest of the facsimiles. You see that? So that would have made a relative Clear, just as you had a computing-machine clear, you know — a lot of held-down fives, and you'd clear these, and the fellow operates better.

The only trouble was, the awareness of awareness unit after a couple, three years of this research kept insisting on exteriorizing. And when exteriorized, we found the individual himself actually was the awareness of awareness unit.

The only trouble was, the awareness of awareness unit after a couple, three years of this research kept insisting on exteriorizing. And when exteriorized, we found the individual himself actually was the awareness of awareness unit.

When he lacked any force or personality after exteriorizing, when he lacked any real idea of identity after he exteriorized, when he felt kind of mildly, hopelessly alone, and he was just weakly sort of outside and out of communication, and so forth, and he felt this way, he hadn't been stabilized.

When he lacked any force or personality after exteriorizing, when he lacked any real idea of identity after he exteriorized, when he felt kind of mildly, hopelessly alone, and he was just weakly sort of outside and out of communication, and so forth, and he felt this way, he hadn't been stabilized.

You sometimes pop somebody out and he feels real bad about it. Well, he hasn't stabilized. He has invested into the body so many characteristics, that he himself depends upon the body to have characteristics. When you have resolved this, you will find out that it was he that was investing the body with characteristics. And he can just as easily invest himself with these characteristics.

You sometimes pop somebody out and he feels real bad about it. Well, he hasn't stabilized. He has invested into the body so many characteristics, that he himself depends upon the body to have characteristics. When you have resolved this, you will find out that it was he that was investing the body with characteristics. And he can just as easily invest himself with these characteristics.

So, the first dynamic was the first dynamic indeed. It was the awareness of awareness unit, and this is covered, as I have said, in Book One.

So, the first dynamic was the first dynamic indeed. It was the awareness of awareness unit, and this is covered, as I have said, in Book One.

Well, then we have the modifiers of the first dynamic. And the first thing which modifies the first dynamic is what we call machinery — the ma-chines of the thetan. And these are actually machines of one kind or another by which he has things done for himself, with which he times his own activities, with which he pretends to go into communication. And that is a very, very sharp, identifiable item — the machines of the thetan. They're very identifiable.

Well, then we have the modifiers of the first dynamic. And the first thing which modifies the first dynamic is what we call machinery — the ma-chines of the thetan. And these are actually machines of one kind or another by which he has things done for himself, with which he times his own activities, with which he pretends to go into communication. And that is a very, very sharp, identifiable item — the machines of the thetan. They're very identifiable.

This is just as identifiable as the house that goes around the stove. Where you consider this thetan the stove, he is giving all of the heat and energy out of this. And he has surrounded himself with various barriers, barricades, traps, gimmicks, whatnots, and he's just sort of built a house around himself, you see — just to this degree.

This is just as identifiable as the house that goes around the stove. Where you consider this thetan the stove, he is giving all of the heat and energy out of this. And he has surrounded himself with various barriers, barricades, traps, gimmicks, whatnots, and he's just sort of built a house around himself, you see — just to this degree.

You exteriorize a lot of thetans and they remind you of the old-time ghost story — because, after all, what are you dealing with, when you're dealing with spirits, but a thetan. You can call him by various names, give him various characteristics.

You exteriorize a lot of thetans and they remind you of the old-time ghost story — because, after all, what are you dealing with, when you're dealing with spirits, but a thetan. You can call him by various names, give him various characteristics.

Many a person feels just exactly like a ghost, in that he's got old clanking chains and his pockets full of tin cans. And he's got all kinds of gimmicks and gadgets that do various, mysterious (and most mysterious to him) things that he can't quite identify — but awfully interesting.

Many a person feels just exactly like a ghost, in that he's got old clanking chains and his pockets full of tin cans. And he's got all kinds of gimmicks and gadgets that do various, mysterious (and most mysterious to him) things that he can't quite identify — but awfully interesting.

And to ask him to give up all these contraptions is an unkindness, be-cause any child has his toys, any business executive has his various foibles and operating machinery and plants, and any president has his bureaus. Any one of these people get along perfectly ably without all these things. You might even have a government if you took all the bureaus and threw them away and let the president govern. (Not advocating absolute monarchy, but just advocating a government.) And so here is the awareness of awareness unit, and here then are the products of, or possessions of, or the creations of, the awareness of awareness unit. And the peculiar thing about these machines is every single one of them was made, hidden and forgotten by the thetan. He is the only one who sired them. Nobody has ever given him a machine.

And to ask him to give up all these contraptions is an unkindness, be-cause any child has his toys, any business executive has his various foibles and operating machinery and plants, and any president has his bureaus. Any one of these people get along perfectly ably without all these things. You might even have a government if you took all the bureaus and threw them away and let the president govern. (Not advocating absolute monarchy, but just advocating a government.) And so here is the awareness of awareness unit, and here then are the products of, or possessions of, or the creations of, the awareness of awareness unit. And the peculiar thing about these machines is every single one of them was made, hidden and forgotten by the thetan. He is the only one who sired them. Nobody has ever given him a machine.

Somebody could have given him an idea for a machine, but he had to make it. And from no source under the sun will any energy be fed into those machines except by the thetan himself. Is this very clear?

Somebody could have given him an idea for a machine, but he had to make it. And from no source under the sun will any energy be fed into those machines except by the thetan himself. Is this very clear?

He cannot eat beefsteak and thus animate his machinery. This does not work; it never will work. But he may, for the sake of randomity, decide that he has to eat beefsteak to keep one of his machines running. But this is just a consideration; just as it is a consideration that he has a machine there in the first place.

He cannot eat beefsteak and thus animate his machinery. This does not work; it never will work. But he may, for the sake of randomity, decide that he has to eat beefsteak to keep one of his machines running. But this is just a consideration; just as it is a consideration that he has a machine there in the first place.

Well, this machinery is a fairly private affair, then, isn't it? He's the fellow who makes it. He's the only one who can knock it to pieces. He's the only one that feeds it energy.

Well, this machinery is a fairly private affair, then, isn't it? He's the fellow who makes it. He's the only one who can knock it to pieces. He's the only one that feeds it energy.

But added to that can be a multiple of considerations which make it possible for him to understand something from somebody else, and thus add it into his own machinery, and thus blame somebody else for having given him a machine. You follow me? He could consider that this had happened. And this is actually practically as good as it having happened.

But added to that can be a multiple of considerations which make it possible for him to understand something from somebody else, and thus add it into his own machinery, and thus blame somebody else for having given him a machine. You follow me? He could consider that this had happened. And this is actually practically as good as it having happened.

If he created something with this intention, "This is now more powerful than myself," he then would have to observe its actions and activities, independently undertaken, and then have to modify and cut down his own so as to always have less power than he had granted.

If he created something with this intention, "This is now more powerful than myself," he then would have to observe its actions and activities, independently undertaken, and then have to modify and cut down his own so as to always have less power than he had granted.

But this is not the creation of a machine. Here we have one little thetan, and the next thing you know, if he is very good at duplication and he considers himself completely able, you have two little thetans. They don't even have to be brothers. And the next thing you know, you've got three little thetans and four little thetans and five little thetans — not done with moonlight, roses and Chanel Number 2. Not done in any system form. Simply overtly, knowingly saying, "Pang!" and another life form appearing. You follow me?

But this is not the creation of a machine. Here we have one little thetan, and the next thing you know, if he is very good at duplication and he considers himself completely able, you have two little thetans. They don't even have to be brothers. And the next thing you know, you've got three little thetans and four little thetans and five little thetans — not done with moonlight, roses and Chanel Number 2. Not done in any system form. Simply overtly, knowingly saying, "Pang!" and another life form appearing. You follow me?

Sex is the supercondensed, many-times-viaed activity of creating other life forms. And the only thing which makes it more complex is the fact that it is considered to be more complex. And it is sufficiently complex that anybody who has been in love would be the first to assert that the whole business is complex.

Sex is the supercondensed, many-times-viaed activity of creating other life forms. And the only thing which makes it more complex is the fact that it is considered to be more complex. And it is sufficiently complex that anybody who has been in love would be the first to assert that the whole business is complex.

Basically, the thetan can simply create, without any system, another living being. Now, there's an important thing. This is an ability of the thetan. But it is not a part of the thetan.

Basically, the thetan can simply create, without any system, another living being. Now, there's an important thing. This is an ability of the thetan. But it is not a part of the thetan.

A thetan can create machinery, but that's intended to go on doing some-thing to him or for him. And this is not life units he's creating. This is machinery, just like that. Just like you go buy a car: You don't expect that car to breathe. Neither does he expect his machinery to have life of its own.

A thetan can create machinery, but that's intended to go on doing some-thing to him or for him. And this is not life units he's creating. This is machinery, just like that. Just like you go buy a car: You don't expect that car to breathe. Neither does he expect his machinery to have life of its own.

But sometimes he gets mixed up and he will endow machinery with life. In Dianetics: The Evolution of a Science I talk about the possibility of setting the mind alongside of the body. This was many times misinterpreted, most markedly in a process — a very bad and harmful process — called "E-Therapy." It had its genus, according to its originator, in Dianetics: The Evolution of a Science, wherein it says the great god Throgmagog is set up alongside of a fellow to advise him and give him good advice, and so forth.

But sometimes he gets mixed up and he will endow machinery with life. In Dianetics: The Evolution of a Science I talk about the possibility of setting the mind alongside of the body. This was many times misinterpreted, most markedly in a process — a very bad and harmful process — called "E-Therapy." It had its genus, according to its originator, in Dianetics: The Evolution of a Science, wherein it says the great god Throgmagog is set up alongside of a fellow to advise him and give him good advice, and so forth.

A person is totally capable of doing this. A man can get himself thoroughly haunted by living beings — living, breathing beings — simply because he can duplicate himself This is not machinery, and it is not part of the thetan, by definition. But it is the thetan moving outward through the second dynamic of creation into a third dynamic of becoming a group.

A person is totally capable of doing this. A man can get himself thoroughly haunted by living beings — living, breathing beings — simply because he can duplicate himself This is not machinery, and it is not part of the thetan, by definition. But it is the thetan moving outward through the second dynamic of creation into a third dynamic of becoming a group.

Now, at any time he can then pull off from this group which he himself has created and leave the group living, breathing and acting. And his own absence does not detract any knowingness from him. Nor would it pull any-thing back from the group.

Now, at any time he can then pull off from this group which he himself has created and leave the group living, breathing and acting. And his own absence does not detract any knowingness from him. Nor would it pull any-thing back from the group.

This is, overtly, the creation of life. And this is how life multiplies in its most basic, simple form. And that is the multiplication of life.

This is, overtly, the creation of life. And this is how life multiplies in its most basic, simple form. And that is the multiplication of life.

So the first dynamic is capable, through the second dynamic, of creating a third dynamic and, if the plans are sufficiently well-laid, a whole species, such as the fourth dynamic.

So the first dynamic is capable, through the second dynamic, of creating a third dynamic and, if the plans are sufficiently well-laid, a whole species, such as the fourth dynamic.

So man might have an entirely common ancestor, an entirely common ancestor — one. Very possible. But who and what would that common ancestor be?

So man might have an entirely common ancestor, an entirely common ancestor — one. Very possible. But who and what would that common ancestor be?

Now, let's look that over when we get up to that, and we discover this individual would have endowed, to make other chess players ... You know, when you make a chess player you have to endow him with full intelligence and self-determinism, otherwise you can't play chess with him. You discover that he, therefore, would not have remained a superior being by the simple act of creating all these other thetans to do this activity. It would have had no connotation of superiority to have done this, since any one of those beings he created could, in its turn, do the same thing.

Now, let's look that over when we get up to that, and we discover this individual would have endowed, to make other chess players ... You know, when you make a chess player you have to endow him with full intelligence and self-determinism, otherwise you can't play chess with him. You discover that he, therefore, would not have remained a superior being by the simple act of creating all these other thetans to do this activity. It would have had no connotation of superiority to have done this, since any one of those beings he created could, in its turn, do the same thing.

Maybe man has eight billion ancestors. And maybe he has only one. Who cares? Nobody. It doesn't make a bit of difference to us.

Maybe man has eight billion ancestors. And maybe he has only one. Who cares? Nobody. It doesn't make a bit of difference to us.

You would have, let us say, a hundred million souls on earth during one period of its ability to advance, and at another period you would have a couple of billion.

You would have, let us say, a hundred million souls on earth during one period of its ability to advance, and at another period you would have a couple of billion.

Well, how could they possibly disappear? Do they ever become less? Do they just always become more and more and more and more and more? No. An individual could repostulate himself back into his original creative entity — you know, he could just say "I am no longer myself...." Nobody else would influence him to do this, you see. He'd say, "I am no longer this unit. I am now another unit which created me in the first place." You see how he could do that?

Well, how could they possibly disappear? Do they ever become less? Do they just always become more and more and more and more and more? No. An individual could repostulate himself back into his original creative entity — you know, he could just say "I am no longer myself...." Nobody else would influence him to do this, you see. He'd say, "I am no longer this unit. I am now another unit which created me in the first place." You see how he could do that?

Because there is no such thing as time. So, therefore, it must go on continuously and continually as a created existence.

Because there is no such thing as time. So, therefore, it must go on continuously and continually as a created existence.

In other words, this thetan could have made five thetans, played a foot-ball game, decided which one was the winner, and then have become the winner. And each one of the five playing could have then become just the winner, and they would not have lost either their identity or anything else.

In other words, this thetan could have made five thetans, played a foot-ball game, decided which one was the winner, and then have become the winner. And each one of the five playing could have then become just the winner, and they would not have lost either their identity or anything else.

The only thing they could possibly lose, and they'd have to shut that off for themselves, would be their knowingness that they had done it. But to have done it at all requires that they would have had to have shut off their knowingness of doing it.

The only thing they could possibly lose, and they'd have to shut that off for themselves, would be their knowingness that they had done it. But to have done it at all requires that they would have had to have shut off their knowingness of doing it.

You recover an individual's knowingness, one of the first things you would recover is the fact that he has occasionally multiplied himself. Now, do you think you understand valence a little better?

You recover an individual's knowingness, one of the first things you would recover is the fact that he has occasionally multiplied himself. Now, do you think you understand valence a little better?

Is it necessarily true that Mama, a thetan, has subdivided herself so that the baby could have a thetan, or be a thetan? No, it has nothing to do with it.

Is it necessarily true that Mama, a thetan, has subdivided herself so that the baby could have a thetan, or be a thetan? No, it has nothing to do with it.

Let's look over the parts of man more thoroughly. We discover that having done this often and many times, an individual has, very markedly, laid aside this ability and has begun to hang on to the "only one" computation, and is holding his ability to be himself closely to himself. And holding his ability to himself, then, and being just himself and concentrating on being himself, he is trying to maintain his identity as a first dynamic. He's long since ceased to duplicate just by saying there is another being out there. He is too involved in his own agreements.

Let's look over the parts of man more thoroughly. We discover that having done this often and many times, an individual has, very markedly, laid aside this ability and has begun to hang on to the "only one" computation, and is holding his ability to be himself closely to himself. And holding his ability to himself, then, and being just himself and concentrating on being himself, he is trying to maintain his identity as a first dynamic. He's long since ceased to duplicate just by saying there is another being out there. He is too involved in his own agreements.

He thinks to create another being he'd have to indulge in sex, and then he discovers he has not really created another being at all. That other being is going along a composite intelligence line, and we are now talking about a body, which is the granted beingness of many individualities based upon one basic individuality, which of course started that genetic line.

He thinks to create another being he'd have to indulge in sex, and then he discovers he has not really created another being at all. That other being is going along a composite intelligence line, and we are now talking about a body, which is the granted beingness of many individualities based upon one basic individuality, which of course started that genetic line.

All right. There isn't any reason to get upset about this. Let's take a very clear picture of this.

All right. There isn't any reason to get upset about this. Let's take a very clear picture of this.

One: a thetan. He can make machines. He has a body, and that's the body. You know, he has acquired a body. All right. The body has a reactive mind.

One: a thetan. He can make machines. He has a body, and that's the body. You know, he has acquired a body. All right. The body has a reactive mind.

What if a thetan got so terribly complex with all of his machinery, and he got so interlocked with so many other individualities and so much grant of beingness in all directions, that he'd forgotten what he was, who he was, and he just knew he was supposed to be this identity and repeat the manufacture or creation of this identity?

What if a thetan got so terribly complex with all of his machinery, and he got so interlocked with so many other individualities and so much grant of beingness in all directions, that he'd forgotten what he was, who he was, and he just knew he was supposed to be this identity and repeat the manufacture or creation of this identity?

As a thetan he would have become solid, and his machinery itself would have composited. Right? And this "himself" becoming solid, well, you might say, would be a body. And his machinery, having composited, would be a reactive mind.

As a thetan he would have become solid, and his machinery itself would have composited. Right? And this "himself" becoming solid, well, you might say, would be a body. And his machinery, having composited, would be a reactive mind.

Thetan plus machinery, as it becomes more condensed and much more complex, with many, many vias, and much more forgettingness, becomes a body with very, very little knowingness but a great deal of automaticity and randomity, with machinery, which is so condensed, finally — picture-making machines and all kinds of other machines — that you have such things as the somatic-mind — reactive-mind characteristics. You follow that?

Thetan plus machinery, as it becomes more condensed and much more complex, with many, many vias, and much more forgettingness, becomes a body with very, very little knowingness but a great deal of automaticity and randomity, with machinery, which is so condensed, finally — picture-making machines and all kinds of other machines — that you have such things as the somatic-mind — reactive-mind characteristics. You follow that?

Actually, these things are terrifically complex and awfully patterned. But you have just seen a thetan plus his machinery become so condensed and so complex, and be joined from so many other quarters and get so interlocked in all directions, that he finally was solid — body. So solid, he can be over-taken and controlled by another thetan plus these machines.

Actually, these things are terrifically complex and awfully patterned. But you have just seen a thetan plus his machinery become so condensed and so complex, and be joined from so many other quarters and get so interlocked in all directions, that he finally was solid — body. So solid, he can be over-taken and controlled by another thetan plus these machines.

Now, unless the body itself is controlled by another thetan, then the re-active mind cannot be controlled by another thetan. The body can control its own reactive mind, or its reactive mind can be controlled by another intelligence.

Now, unless the body itself is controlled by another thetan, then the re-active mind cannot be controlled by another thetan. The body can control its own reactive mind, or its reactive mind can be controlled by another intelligence.

Only now do we get into the manifestation of the machinery being actually, overtly controlled by other intelligences. A thetan's machinery condenses to a point where the thetan himself is under control, and being himself under control, we then have the manifestation of the reactive mind.

Only now do we get into the manifestation of the machinery being actually, overtly controlled by other intelligences. A thetan's machinery condenses to a point where the thetan himself is under control, and being himself under control, we then have the manifestation of the reactive mind.

See, we're not calling that thetan machinery any more, are we though? It is so complex, and it now belongs to something which is so thoroughly owned and controlled, that any part of it can be owned or controlled.

See, we're not calling that thetan machinery any more, are we though? It is so complex, and it now belongs to something which is so thoroughly owned and controlled, that any part of it can be owned or controlled.

Parts of the body are: thetan, thetan machinery, body and the reactive-somatic mind. (Doesn't matter whether we call it reactive mind or somatic mind. Actually, there is no real differentiation between the two.) Follow that? There are the parts of man.

Parts of the body are: thetan, thetan machinery, body and the reactive-somatic mind. (Doesn't matter whether we call it reactive mind or somatic mind. Actually, there is no real differentiation between the two.) Follow that? There are the parts of man.

But a thetan as an individual can sexually create another thetan, and so become a group. So we have one, two, three dynamics, see? First dynamic can create (that's a second dynamic) other individuals, and you then have a third dynamic. And if the pattern of creation is sufficiently manifest, we can then have something we would call a fourth dynamic, which would be a species. And we would have, then, a class.

But a thetan as an individual can sexually create another thetan, and so become a group. So we have one, two, three dynamics, see? First dynamic can create (that's a second dynamic) other individuals, and you then have a third dynamic. And if the pattern of creation is sufficiently manifest, we can then have something we would call a fourth dynamic, which would be a species. And we would have, then, a class.

But a species automatically states that there must be other species. And we would work out, therefore, an interdependency of life form and behavior and action which we see here on earth — Homo sapiens, the animal kingdom, and so forth.

But a species automatically states that there must be other species. And we would work out, therefore, an interdependency of life form and behavior and action which we see here on earth — Homo sapiens, the animal kingdom, and so forth.

Now, in order to get to a higher level of truth than simply Homo sapiens, it is necessary to investigate the remaining four dynamics. And we look over and we find out that each animal is a species. We find out the animal kingdom works up the same way, really. But no thetans are quite as anxious to control animals or animal bodies — no thetans are as anxious to control them — as they are the bodies of men. Men can talk, they can walk, they have intelligence, they can fight, and so forth. And so a thetan would much rather have a man's body or pester men, or get involved with men as did those thetans in early Greece that we call now, laughingly enough, Greek mythology.

Now, in order to get to a higher level of truth than simply Homo sapiens, it is necessary to investigate the remaining four dynamics. And we look over and we find out that each animal is a species. We find out the animal kingdom works up the same way, really. But no thetans are quite as anxious to control animals or animal bodies — no thetans are as anxious to control them — as they are the bodies of men. Men can talk, they can walk, they have intelligence, they can fight, and so forth. And so a thetan would much rather have a man's body or pester men, or get involved with men as did those thetans in early Greece that we call now, laughingly enough, Greek mythology.

Men can get involved very easily with spirits, because the men and the affairs of men are sufficiently complex to be interesting to control. Take the affairs of a rabbit; they are not at all interesting to control. I mean, a rabbit hops, a rabbit eats, a rabbit goes through many evolutions and mostly he runs and is frightened, and so forth.

Men can get involved very easily with spirits, because the men and the affairs of men are sufficiently complex to be interesting to control. Take the affairs of a rabbit; they are not at all interesting to control. I mean, a rabbit hops, a rabbit eats, a rabbit goes through many evolutions and mostly he runs and is frightened, and so forth.

And I myself have tried to get interested in monitoring rabbits. It's a little more interesting to monitor a wolf, but again, the affairs are not very complex.

And I myself have tried to get interested in monitoring rabbits. It's a little more interesting to monitor a wolf, but again, the affairs are not very complex.

Well, the affairs of man are very complex, and they would interest some-body enormously. So thetans are perfectly content to control men. Men are a terrific theta trap. Women are a better one.

Well, the affairs of man are very complex, and they would interest some-body enormously. So thetans are perfectly content to control men. Men are a terrific theta trap. Women are a better one.

And we see, then, that the animals themselves, quite uniformly, are simply the body plus reactive-somatic mind. And we don't have the other two manifestations.

And we see, then, that the animals themselves, quite uniformly, are simply the body plus reactive-somatic mind. And we don't have the other two manifestations.

In other words, we've just watched a condensation of a thetan plus machinery down into a rabbit — see, thetan plus machinery, and eventually we had a rabbit. He just got more and more complex, and we had a whole species of rabbits, and again, we have gone through the one, two, three, four dynamics in terms of rabbits. See? And we could do the same thing in wolves.

In other words, we've just watched a condensation of a thetan plus machinery down into a rabbit — see, thetan plus machinery, and eventually we had a rabbit. He just got more and more complex, and we had a whole species of rabbits, and again, we have gone through the one, two, three, four dynamics in terms of rabbits. See? And we could do the same thing in wolves.

The first dynamic, there was a thetan, and he had his machinery. And he decided to, through the second dynamic (creation, duplication), achieve a similar entity. And then he achieved another independent personality, and this was the third dynamic. And then he decided to make a pattern out of the whole thing, and all they — the whole of them, now — decided to make a complete personality out of this thing. And we finally arrived at a point where we had a species of wolves. See, and that's counteropposed to rabbits, and man, too. Same way with camels or rhinoceroses or anything else.

The first dynamic, there was a thetan, and he had his machinery. And he decided to, through the second dynamic (creation, duplication), achieve a similar entity. And then he achieved another independent personality, and this was the third dynamic. And then he decided to make a pattern out of the whole thing, and all they — the whole of them, now — decided to make a complete personality out of this thing. And we finally arrived at a point where we had a species of wolves. See, and that's counteropposed to rabbits, and man, too. Same way with camels or rhinoceroses or anything else.

So, this would be an interesting thing, to continue on with something called psychotherapy in the absence of this information, wouldn't it? Because all you would do would be to get more complex and more complex and more complex. Because you would run into further and further and further complexities.

So, this would be an interesting thing, to continue on with something called psychotherapy in the absence of this information, wouldn't it? Because all you would do would be to get more complex and more complex and more complex. Because you would run into further and further and further complexities.

And the whole problem depends upon simplicity for its solution, since the solution itself must be the problem exactly, to be a solution. So therefore, if you were or duplicated any problem perfectly, there would be nothing left there but static, wouldn't there? There'd just be a static — no mass, wave-length, position — and so that would be a zero. There would be qualities, thoughts or life potential. There could even be personality — as I say, qualities — but there would not be a big mass there.

And the whole problem depends upon simplicity for its solution, since the solution itself must be the problem exactly, to be a solution. So therefore, if you were or duplicated any problem perfectly, there would be nothing left there but static, wouldn't there? There'd just be a static — no mass, wave-length, position — and so that would be a zero. There would be qualities, thoughts or life potential. There could even be personality — as I say, qualities — but there would not be a big mass there.

So in order to obtain mass you have to have problems, vias, all sorts of things. Therefore, psychotherapy is defeative. It could never be anything else but defeative.

So in order to obtain mass you have to have problems, vias, all sorts of things. Therefore, psychotherapy is defeative. It could never be anything else but defeative.

So, as we look this picture over, we discover that the auditor is addressing actually four items. And if he cannot differentiate, one to another, amongst these four items, he certainly is going to be in trouble.

So, as we look this picture over, we discover that the auditor is addressing actually four items. And if he cannot differentiate, one to another, amongst these four items, he certainly is going to be in trouble.

There is only one of those items which has enough truth left in it, has enough ability, personality and awareness to deserve his attention. And that would be the awareness of awareness unit itself, which we call in Scientology, a thetan. That would be the one thing which deserved his attention.

There is only one of those items which has enough truth left in it, has enough ability, personality and awareness to deserve his attention. And that would be the awareness of awareness unit itself, which we call in Scientology, a thetan. That would be the one thing which deserved his attention.

Other than that, he might as well go out here and process rocks. Process a body — process a rock. I mean, the body, actually, is even less complex than a rock. A rock is sufficiently complex to have baffled even Albert Einstein. But bodies — they only baffle people like the Mayo Clinic.

Other than that, he might as well go out here and process rocks. Process a body — process a rock. I mean, the body, actually, is even less complex than a rock. A rock is sufficiently complex to have baffled even Albert Einstein. But bodies — they only baffle people like the Mayo Clinic.

If you've got to get complex, let's get really solid and dense. Because that tells you how many vias there are in something; how dense is it? That tells you how many vias there are on its communication lines.

If you've got to get complex, let's get really solid and dense. Because that tells you how many vias there are in something; how dense is it? That tells you how many vias there are on its communication lines.

The distance from cause to effect in a rock is beset by so many vias, and is so interwoven and is so complex, that both cause and effect of the rock are lost.

The distance from cause to effect in a rock is beset by so many vias, and is so interwoven and is so complex, that both cause and effect of the rock are lost.

The impulse toward religion on the part of most people is to discover cause — basic cause; "Why?" — and the effort to discover basic cause leads them to try to go through these various vias. And it's like walking through this famous labyrinth of ancient times, and they only get lost. Because you don't find cause and effect that way. You simply find cause and effect by finding the highest level of freedom, assuming it and then knowing. And you will know, then, cause and effect, because you will be cause and you are then capable of being an effect.

The impulse toward religion on the part of most people is to discover cause — basic cause; "Why?" — and the effort to discover basic cause leads them to try to go through these various vias. And it's like walking through this famous labyrinth of ancient times, and they only get lost. Because you don't find cause and effect that way. You simply find cause and effect by finding the highest level of freedom, assuming it and then knowing. And you will know, then, cause and effect, because you will be cause and you are then capable of being an effect.

All right. We can dispose of this problem quite easily by knocking out of existence all those factors which we are not interested in processing.

All right. We can dispose of this problem quite easily by knocking out of existence all those factors which we are not interested in processing.

Now, as we go up the line and as processes have bettered, we discover that as we are better able to understand something, we are more able to control it. The more able we are to control something, the less need there is to process it so that it can be controlled. Is that right? We don't have to process it to control it.

Now, as we go up the line and as processes have bettered, we discover that as we are better able to understand something, we are more able to control it. The more able we are to control something, the less need there is to process it so that it can be controlled. Is that right? We don't have to process it to control it.

So in modern Dianetics and Scientology, it is only necessary simply to do this: to knock out the factors you do not want to process, because you do understand sufficiently to control.

So in modern Dianetics and Scientology, it is only necessary simply to do this: to knock out the factors you do not want to process, because you do understand sufficiently to control.

And the first of those that would go would be that most illusive series of factors known as the reactive-somatic mind. We can control it. If you don't believe this, read Book One. Study up processes in that and Science of Survival, and process yourself a few engrams. You can control that mind. You can knock it backwards and forwards and turn it wrong-side-out. You can lockscan — do all sorts of interesting things. But that is all in the interest of learning what it is all about. And once you have known these things, by the way — you know its anatomy — there is no further sense in trying to knock it out of existence, because we can assume control of it. So you're not going to process that.

And the first of those that would go would be that most illusive series of factors known as the reactive-somatic mind. We can control it. If you don't believe this, read Book One. Study up processes in that and Science of Survival, and process yourself a few engrams. You can control that mind. You can knock it backwards and forwards and turn it wrong-side-out. You can lockscan — do all sorts of interesting things. But that is all in the interest of learning what it is all about. And once you have known these things, by the way — you know its anatomy — there is no further sense in trying to knock it out of existence, because we can assume control of it. So you're not going to process that.

Now, we have already learned, through the vast example of medicine and other factors, that the actual direct processing of the body is, in itself, not to be countenanced. It's just of no use, really, to process the body. So we'll just say, "Body and reactive mind — process these? No." Well, how about the thetan's machinery? Well, it's interesting to process. It's interesting to process long enough to a point where you can control it. But we know enough about it now so that an individual could come into the possession and control of it, if he wanted to. We have processes which do this. So why process it?

Now, we have already learned, through the vast example of medicine and other factors, that the actual direct processing of the body is, in itself, not to be countenanced. It's just of no use, really, to process the body. So we'll just say, "Body and reactive mind — process these? No." Well, how about the thetan's machinery? Well, it's interesting to process. It's interesting to process long enough to a point where you can control it. But we know enough about it now so that an individual could come into the possession and control of it, if he wanted to. We have processes which do this. So why process it?

And this leaves us, then, with this now-very-narrow sphere to be processed, which if processed, can then assume control of the other three factors, and being able to do this, can of course resolve all his own problems without any trouble.

And this leaves us, then, with this now-very-narrow sphere to be processed, which if processed, can then assume control of the other three factors, and being able to do this, can of course resolve all his own problems without any trouble.

So the short way through on the thing is simply to separate the awareness of awareness unit from these other items, have him recognize his identity and his capability by putting him through various drills, and then having him turn around and do what he pleases about setting his own machinery to rights, in setting the body to rights, in setting the somatic-reactive mind to rights — and, if you do a good enough job, why, just thinking that they're right is sufficient to have them be right.

So the short way through on the thing is simply to separate the awareness of awareness unit from these other items, have him recognize his identity and his capability by putting him through various drills, and then having him turn around and do what he pleases about setting his own machinery to rights, in setting the body to rights, in setting the somatic-reactive mind to rights — and, if you do a good enough job, why, just thinking that they're right is sufficient to have them be right.

There's where you got "right thoughts." "Right thoughts" is a wonderful process, providing you have a Clear to begin with. It's not a process you would use on a sick man.

There's where you got "right thoughts." "Right thoughts" is a wonderful process, providing you have a Clear to begin with. It's not a process you would use on a sick man.

Actually, all a right thought would be, would simply be a thought which would promote the optimum survival on the optimum number of dynamics. That would be a right thought. It has this precise definition.

Actually, all a right thought would be, would simply be a thought which would promote the optimum survival on the optimum number of dynamics. That would be a right thought. It has this precise definition.

All right. Now, if all this is the case and we can see all this, something else comes into the picture: If all we're interested in is processing this awareness of awareness unit, where are we going to enter this picture? There must be some kind of a button.

All right. Now, if all this is the case and we can see all this, something else comes into the picture: If all we're interested in is processing this awareness of awareness unit, where are we going to enter this picture? There must be some kind of a button.

Of course, the button is "Be three feet back of your head" for most people; that accomplishes it. And you go on and drill him some more, and he recognizes some more, and he'll start telling you about his machinery and his body and his reactive bank. He'll tell you all about these things. So "Be three feet back of your head" is a very, very magic button.

Of course, the button is "Be three feet back of your head" for most people; that accomplishes it. And you go on and drill him some more, and he recognizes some more, and he'll start telling you about his machinery and his body and his reactive bank. He'll tell you all about these things. So "Be three feet back of your head" is a very, very magic button.

Well, there's a magic button, still, for those people who don't do this immediately. And that magic button is on a very neglected part, in Scientology, of Dianetics. And that is the overt-act — motivator phenomena. The magic but-ton is right there.

Well, there's a magic button, still, for those people who don't do this immediately. And that magic button is on a very neglected part, in Scientology, of Dianetics. And that is the overt-act — motivator phenomena. The magic but-ton is right there.

Because here is the mechanical process by which a thetan becomes solid enough to be a body — surrounded by his machinery, now becomes solid and complex enough to be called a reactive-somatic mind.

Because here is the mechanical process by which a thetan becomes solid enough to be a body — surrounded by his machinery, now becomes solid and complex enough to be called a reactive-somatic mind.

It's the overt-act — motivator phenomena which is the mechanics of this hardening or solidifying process.

It's the overt-act — motivator phenomena which is the mechanics of this hardening or solidifying process.

And now there's one lies immediately behind that, which is the consideration which matches the overt and motivator. Well, I'll talk to you about the consideration in a moment. And I'll tell you about the mechanics first.

And now there's one lies immediately behind that, which is the consideration which matches the overt and motivator. Well, I'll talk to you about the consideration in a moment. And I'll tell you about the mechanics first.

The mechanic is simply this: An overt act is a harmful act performed against another. And it could, of course, be performed against others. So that's a precision definition. If you were asked that on an examination paper, that would be your answer to the question. An overt act is a harmful act performed against another or others.

The mechanic is simply this: An overt act is a harmful act performed against another. And it could, of course, be performed against others. So that's a precision definition. If you were asked that on an examination paper, that would be your answer to the question. An overt act is a harmful act performed against another or others.

An overt act could actually, technically, theoretically, be performed against oneself, couldn't it? Theoretically. People just try to do that, however. We don't have to take it into account particularly. But remember, this is possible.

An overt act could actually, technically, theoretically, be performed against oneself, couldn't it? Theoretically. People just try to do that, however. We don't have to take it into account particularly. But remember, this is possible.

And it actually could be even more precise if you said it was a harmful act on any dynamic. And that would be the clearest statement that you could make of that.

And it actually could be even more precise if you said it was a harmful act on any dynamic. And that would be the clearest statement that you could make of that.

Now, a motivator is an overt act against oneself by another. A motivator is an overt act performed against oneself by another. In other words, a motivator is a harmful action performed by somebody else against oneself.

Now, a motivator is an overt act against oneself by another. A motivator is an overt act performed against oneself by another. In other words, a motivator is a harmful action performed by somebody else against oneself.

Bill hits Joe with a club. Well, to Joe, that is a motivator. He is the one who has been hit. He is the hittee. And Bill over here has done the hitting — he's the hitter — and he, of course, has performed the overt act. And he has given Joe a motivator. So it has something to do with viewpoint, doesn't it?

Bill hits Joe with a club. Well, to Joe, that is a motivator. He is the one who has been hit. He is the hittee. And Bill over here has done the hitting — he's the hitter — and he, of course, has performed the overt act. And he has given Joe a motivator. So it has something to do with viewpoint, doesn't it?

Well, you're right downstairs from pan-determinism. You see that then you have to have the idea of self-determinism before you can have overt acts and motivators, and that pan-determinism would clarify overt acts and motivators. You see? You wouldn't be taking sides anymore.

Well, you're right downstairs from pan-determinism. You see that then you have to have the idea of self-determinism before you can have overt acts and motivators, and that pan-determinism would clarify overt acts and motivators. You see? You wouldn't be taking sides anymore.

All right. If one receives a motivator, he then may consider himself licensed to perform an overt act against the person who harmed him. Anyone receiving a motivator considers that he is now licensed to perform an overt act. And that is the basis of all licensing.

All right. If one receives a motivator, he then may consider himself licensed to perform an overt act against the person who harmed him. Anyone receiving a motivator considers that he is now licensed to perform an overt act. And that is the basis of all licensing.

That is why a boot in a training camp in the marine corps is kicked around so thoroughly, and why they really call him a boot. He is thoroughly, arduously pounded around to a point — he is commanded so thoroughly — that he is given sufficient motivators to be the meanest soldier in the world, and to be thoroughly overt against people in his vicinity, making them obey his orders when he becomes a private first class, a corporal, a sergeant.

That is why a boot in a training camp in the marine corps is kicked around so thoroughly, and why they really call him a boot. He is thoroughly, arduously pounded around to a point — he is commanded so thoroughly — that he is given sufficient motivators to be the meanest soldier in the world, and to be thoroughly overt against people in his vicinity, making them obey his orders when he becomes a private first class, a corporal, a sergeant.

Without that arduous course of training he would not have enough motivators to carry him through his military career. And thus, the "big brother" policy of that great, glorious institution, the United States Army, is chaos.

Without that arduous course of training he would not have enough motivators to carry him through his military career. And thus, the "big brother" policy of that great, glorious institution, the United States Army, is chaos.

This is not one-sided. It isn't because I've been just a marine and haven't been in the army. I've been in the army, too. I've been in the army and the navy and the marine corps. And I naturally know which one's the best outfit.

This is not one-sided. It isn't because I've been just a marine and haven't been in the army. I've been in the army, too. I've been in the army and the navy and the marine corps. And I naturally know which one's the best outfit.

But the funny part of it is, that this "big brother" policy — "Let's pat all the poor little recruits on the head and make them very, very conscious of the fact that we're doing our best for them" — breeds you up privates first class, corporals and sergeants who will not make their orders felt. And in battle, instead of barking out a command or two which people immediately obey, they hint that maybe, possibly somebody might — if he gets around to it, of course — fire his gun.

But the funny part of it is, that this "big brother" policy — "Let's pat all the poor little recruits on the head and make them very, very conscious of the fact that we're doing our best for them" — breeds you up privates first class, corporals and sergeants who will not make their orders felt. And in battle, instead of barking out a command or two which people immediately obey, they hint that maybe, possibly somebody might — if he gets around to it, of course — fire his gun.

This accounts for the fact that when the army takes a piece of ground alongside of a regiment of marines, the army doesn't take any ground but marine ground. This is a direct fact, I mean, in battle. You never put an army regiment up alongside of a marine regiment. You couldn't do it.

This accounts for the fact that when the army takes a piece of ground alongside of a regiment of marines, the army doesn't take any ground but marine ground. This is a direct fact, I mean, in battle. You never put an army regiment up alongside of a marine regiment. You couldn't do it.

It has its inception right in training. And although the marine corps has had to buy, wholeheartedly, the entire army policy on paper, they don't con-duct their training camps the way they say they do. The training camp at Quantico is still carried on very much the way the training camp at Quantico has always been carried on. And those people up in Washington can write all the orders and regulations they want, training must go on in Quantico. Parris Island, same way.

It has its inception right in training. And although the marine corps has had to buy, wholeheartedly, the entire army policy on paper, they don't con-duct their training camps the way they say they do. The training camp at Quantico is still carried on very much the way the training camp at Quantico has always been carried on. And those people up in Washington can write all the orders and regulations they want, training must go on in Quantico. Parris Island, same way.

He's got to have — to be given, actually — actually has to be given enough motivators to last him his military career; just right like that. Because actually, when he is really in service, and so forth, men tend to be rather decent to each other, and it's not easy for an individual to gather them.

He's got to have — to be given, actually — actually has to be given enough motivators to last him his military career; just right like that. Because actually, when he is really in service, and so forth, men tend to be rather decent to each other, and it's not easy for an individual to gather them.

Oh, he can try. He'll occasionally get a ... Life can get very arduous, and so forth, to him.

Oh, he can try. He'll occasionally get a ... Life can get very arduous, and so forth, to him.

Then the enemy, in the opening of action, will begin to provide motivators. And the enemy will give him a lot of motivators. And then, he is then licensed to fight. And unless he has been licensed to fight all the way up along the line by motivators, he is not a good soldier.

Then the enemy, in the opening of action, will begin to provide motivators. And the enemy will give him a lot of motivators. And then, he is then licensed to fight. And unless he has been licensed to fight all the way up along the line by motivators, he is not a good soldier.

And unless you have been badly processed, you will never have the right to badly process anybody. You'll always have to process somebody well, won't you?

And unless you have been badly processed, you will never have the right to badly process anybody. You'll always have to process somebody well, won't you?

Now, unless you yourself have, to some slight degree, been controlled and pushed around, you will never be really willing in an auditing session to push somebody around. And once in a while it's necessary to push somebody around. Believe me, it's necessary.

Now, unless you yourself have, to some slight degree, been controlled and pushed around, you will never be really willing in an auditing session to push somebody around. And once in a while it's necessary to push somebody around. Believe me, it's necessary.

All right. The stress and strain of life is made up between these two factors: the overt act and the motivator. And these get into an interesting state of affairs.

All right. The stress and strain of life is made up between these two factors: the overt act and the motivator. And these get into an interesting state of affairs.

When one commits an overt act without having received a motivator-you see, he wasn't licensed-he attempts, then, to mock up or acquire a proper motivator or justify his own harmful action. You know?

When one commits an overt act without having received a motivator-you see, he wasn't licensed-he attempts, then, to mock up or acquire a proper motivator or justify his own harmful action. You know?

He walked down the street, there was a fellow there he had never been introduced to-no quarrel-and he all of a sudden walked up to this fellow and he hit him in the teeth. You meet him twenty minutes later and you say, "Hey! What happened?" And he'll say, "Why, that fellow spat on me." Nothing like this occurred, see. He'll have to believe this, though, to have had the license to hit the other fellow.

He walked down the street, there was a fellow there he had never been introduced to-no quarrel-and he all of a sudden walked up to this fellow and he hit him in the teeth. You meet him twenty minutes later and you say, "Hey! What happened?" And he'll say, "Why, that fellow spat on me." Nothing like this occurred, see. He'll have to believe this, though, to have had the license to hit the other fellow.

An overt act delivered in the absence of a motivator, we call an unmotivated act. It wasn't an overt act, then, was it? It's an unmotivated act. Actually, these are the same class-unmotivated act and overt act-with this exception: A person was licensed when he undertook this overt act. And he was not licensed when he undertook an unmotivated act. Technical terms, which you will be using quite a little bit.

An overt act delivered in the absence of a motivator, we call an unmotivated act. It wasn't an overt act, then, was it? It's an unmotivated act. Actually, these are the same class-unmotivated act and overt act-with this exception: A person was licensed when he undertook this overt act. And he was not licensed when he undertook an unmotivated act. Technical terms, which you will be using quite a little bit.

Now, a justifier is the technical term we apply to the mock-up or overt act demanded by a person guilty of an unmotivated act. This fellow hits this other fellow in the teeth, goes down the street, and says, "He spat on me!" That is the justifier.

Now, a justifier is the technical term we apply to the mock-up or overt act demanded by a person guilty of an unmotivated act. This fellow hits this other fellow in the teeth, goes down the street, and says, "He spat on me!" That is the justifier.

The justifier we understand not to have happened (nonexistent), as an effort to justify the fact that the fellow committed an unmotivated act. So we have unmotivated act and justifier going together. And we have motivator-overt act.

The justifier we understand not to have happened (nonexistent), as an effort to justify the fact that the fellow committed an unmotivated act. So we have unmotivated act and justifier going together. And we have motivator-overt act.

Actually, motivator-overt act is perfectly all right. There's nothing wrong with a motivator-overt-act sequence. Nothing wrong with it. It will always balance out. Everything will be equal. Nobody will ever go insane, no matter if he gets his head cut off or anything else. If we are dealing with nothing but motivator-overt-act phenomena, see-we're just dealing with that sequence only-nobody will ever become insane, upset or even hurt. Be-cause he can always get out of this, one way or the other.

Actually, motivator-overt act is perfectly all right. There's nothing wrong with a motivator-overt-act sequence. Nothing wrong with it. It will always balance out. Everything will be equal. Nobody will ever go insane, no matter if he gets his head cut off or anything else. If we are dealing with nothing but motivator-overt-act phenomena, see-we're just dealing with that sequence only-nobody will ever become insane, upset or even hurt. Be-cause he can always get out of this, one way or the other.

The fellow did an action harmful to another, which other had never harmed him. This is so much the case that there is a very interesting novel written about World War I, about the fate of one Sergeant Grescha, a Russian sergeant who was given bluntly, and he received, an unmotivated act from the German government. He was hanged for no crime.

The fellow did an action harmful to another, which other had never harmed him. This is so much the case that there is a very interesting novel written about World War I, about the fate of one Sergeant Grescha, a Russian sergeant who was given bluntly, and he received, an unmotivated act from the German government. He was hanged for no crime.

And this novel traces the downfall of Kaiser Bill's empire to this one unmotivated act-so much so, that it tries to teach this lesson (whether true or not): That nation which harms another without just cause is itself doomed. That's possibly quite true.

And this novel traces the downfall of Kaiser Bill's empire to this one unmotivated act-so much so, that it tries to teach this lesson (whether true or not): That nation which harms another without just cause is itself doomed. That's possibly quite true.

But it is certainly true of an individual. That person who harms another without just reason is doomed. And that's why a thetan is doomed, because he can never receive a motivator. That is the exact reason why we have a dwindling spiral. There is no other reason.

But it is certainly true of an individual. That person who harms another without just reason is doomed. And that's why a thetan is doomed, because he can never receive a motivator. That is the exact reason why we have a dwindling spiral. There is no other reason.

A thetan has no mass, no wavelength, no actual location beyond what he supposes to have. How can he ever have received a motivator? His original, primary action must always, then, have been an unmotivated act — so much so, that the overt-act — motivator sequence in actuality, in life, originally did not exist.

A thetan has no mass, no wavelength, no actual location beyond what he supposes to have. How can he ever have received a motivator? His original, primary action must always, then, have been an unmotivated act — so much so, that the overt-act — motivator sequence in actuality, in life, originally did not exist.

Today, however, we can look at status quo: Johnny comes over and he steals your toys and you go and hit him and knock him flat. You're not going to suffer for having knocked him flat. And so we get enough of these actions going through life, so that there appears to be — just as isness appears to be and actually isn't — there appears to be, then, an overt-act — motivator phenomena going forward in life. But it is preceded, and was preceded on the track, by an unmotivated act — justifier sequence.

Today, however, we can look at status quo: Johnny comes over and he steals your toys and you go and hit him and knock him flat. You're not going to suffer for having knocked him flat. And so we get enough of these actions going through life, so that there appears to be — just as isness appears to be and actually isn't — there appears to be, then, an overt-act — motivator phenomena going forward in life. But it is preceded, and was preceded on the track, by an unmotivated act — justifier sequence.

A thetan can never, never, never be harmed. But he can consider that he is harmed. And considering that he is harmed, he can then act harmed and really be very unhappy about the whole thing.

A thetan can never, never, never be harmed. But he can consider that he is harmed. And considering that he is harmed, he can then act harmed and really be very unhappy about the whole thing.

And he can go right downstairs, straight into the basement. Because he has never received a motivator. Everything a preclear tells you is a search for a justifier. Remember that. His endless search through his bank is only search for justifiers. And when he starts searching for justifiers, he very rap-idly wears out what few actual, credible motivators he has. He wears these out immediately. He as-ises them. And he doesn't have anywhere near, any-where near enough motivators. He doesn't have anywhere near enough motivators.

And he can go right downstairs, straight into the basement. Because he has never received a motivator. Everything a preclear tells you is a search for a justifier. Remember that. His endless search through his bank is only search for justifiers. And when he starts searching for justifiers, he very rap-idly wears out what few actual, credible motivators he has. He wears these out immediately. He as-ises them. And he doesn't have anywhere near, any-where near enough motivators. He doesn't have anywhere near enough motivators.

And if he hasn't enough motivators, he of course, then, must be guilty of unmotivated acts. And being guilty of unmotivated acts, we have this queer business, how that everybody has to dream up how badly he is treated, what terrible condition he is in, in order to live with his fellows at all. He has to be sick, he has to be wronged. He has to be betrayed.

And if he hasn't enough motivators, he of course, then, must be guilty of unmotivated acts. And being guilty of unmotivated acts, we have this queer business, how that everybody has to dream up how badly he is treated, what terrible condition he is in, in order to live with his fellows at all. He has to be sick, he has to be wronged. He has to be betrayed.

This thirst for being betrayed is the most strange thing that you ever tried to examine amongst man. But his efforts to tell you about how he is betrayed, and how many times, and how he was betrayed, by whom, is an action in a conversation by which he is trying to mock up enough justifiers. He's giving you justifiers ... Remember, justifier isn't true. See, justifier. He's giving you justifiers, and he pretends he's giving you motivators.

This thirst for being betrayed is the most strange thing that you ever tried to examine amongst man. But his efforts to tell you about how he is betrayed, and how many times, and how he was betrayed, by whom, is an action in a conversation by which he is trying to mock up enough justifiers. He's giving you justifiers ... Remember, justifier isn't true. See, justifier. He's giving you justifiers, and he pretends he's giving you motivators.

Look that over. So there's only one real trick you'd have to play on a thetan in order to get this into the dwindling-spiral category and into the category of unmotivated acts and justifiers. There's only one way you could do this, and that was to define "harm" for him.

Look that over. So there's only one real trick you'd have to play on a thetan in order to get this into the dwindling-spiral category and into the category of unmotivated acts and justifiers. There's only one way you could do this, and that was to define "harm" for him.

And now we've moved into the field of consideration, haven't we? Good and evil — R2-61: Things are bad; that's a consideration. Things are good; that's a consideration. It only requires the consideration that harm can take place to then set off the chain-fission reaction of unmotivated acts and justifiers. It takes an education that you can do something harmful. You have to be carefully taught that your actions can be harmful before any dwindling spiral will occur.

And now we've moved into the field of consideration, haven't we? Good and evil — R2-61: Things are bad; that's a consideration. Things are good; that's a consideration. It only requires the consideration that harm can take place to then set off the chain-fission reaction of unmotivated acts and justifiers. It takes an education that you can do something harmful. You have to be carefully taught that your actions can be harmful before any dwindling spiral will occur.

Now, you could only be taught that these could occur if you yourself had invented it in the first place. We're again back to overt-act — motivator sequences in the field of considerations.

Now, you could only be taught that these could occur if you yourself had invented it in the first place. We're again back to overt-act — motivator sequences in the field of considerations.

A person intended to be destructive and was destructive. And he in-tended this action to be a harmful action. He then has defined for himself "harmful." But he doesn't really come into a play of resenting harm or resisting it or doing anything about it until somebody else destroys some object or product which he himself has created. And when this occurs, he then is in this interesting state: He has to define harm for the other fellow. But he had to do it himself first, for the basic reason that he had to communicate first to be communicated to. A thetan had to communicate before he could be communicated to, always.

A person intended to be destructive and was destructive. And he in-tended this action to be a harmful action. He then has defined for himself "harmful." But he doesn't really come into a play of resenting harm or resisting it or doing anything about it until somebody else destroys some object or product which he himself has created. And when this occurs, he then is in this interesting state: He has to define harm for the other fellow. But he had to do it himself first, for the basic reason that he had to communicate first to be communicated to. A thetan had to communicate before he could be communicated to, always.

How is this? Nobody would have known where the devil he was in order to communicate to him, unless he'd put up a signal.

How is this? Nobody would have known where the devil he was in order to communicate to him, unless he'd put up a signal.

All right. So we have the thetan guilty of an infinity of unmotivated acts. Bodies — he's created them against bodies. Good heavens! A young fellow walking down the street; all of a sudden this thetan comes along and zaps him silly. Well, what did that boy ever do to that thetan? Nothing! But if you met that thetan twenty minutes later, he would explain what the boy had done. And this is a lie, isn't it?

All right. So we have the thetan guilty of an infinity of unmotivated acts. Bodies — he's created them against bodies. Good heavens! A young fellow walking down the street; all of a sudden this thetan comes along and zaps him silly. Well, what did that boy ever do to that thetan? Nothing! But if you met that thetan twenty minutes later, he would explain what the boy had done. And this is a lie, isn't it?

So a justifier is always a lie, and any solidity or departure from static is a lie. So the way we depart from the absolute truth of static is via the lies of justifiers.

So a justifier is always a lie, and any solidity or departure from static is a lie. So the way we depart from the absolute truth of static is via the lies of justifiers.

This is the course of the dwindling spiral. And this is hallucination. This is black masses. The fellow can only see black masses. This is the idea of being problems to himself. This is the idea of his difficulties with communication, his inability to be aesthetic, his inability to create, his inability to be handsome or her inability to be beautiful. These are all traced to the fact that there is a long departure here from static — which itself is beauty — a long, long, long departure. As we go down the line, we finally get way down the line.

This is the course of the dwindling spiral. And this is hallucination. This is black masses. The fellow can only see black masses. This is the idea of being problems to himself. This is the idea of his difficulties with communication, his inability to be aesthetic, his inability to create, his inability to be handsome or her inability to be beautiful. These are all traced to the fact that there is a long departure here from static — which itself is beauty — a long, long, long departure. As we go down the line, we finally get way down the line.

By what route? The route of justifiers. Any justifier is a lie. Any lie will bring about, eventually, a solidity. All solidities are made up of only lies. This universe pretends to be a good universe. But, by its very existence, it must be a lie.

By what route? The route of justifiers. Any justifier is a lie. Any lie will bring about, eventually, a solidity. All solidities are made up of only lies. This universe pretends to be a good universe. But, by its very existence, it must be a lie.

Now, what is the route of the dwindling spiral? Via justifiers. A thetan also has this one (this is not in addition, but this is just part of the same package): He has an anxiety about creating an effect. His highest effort there, in terms of third-dynamic relations, is to create an effect.

Now, what is the route of the dwindling spiral? Via justifiers. A thetan also has this one (this is not in addition, but this is just part of the same package): He has an anxiety about creating an effect. His highest effort there, in terms of third-dynamic relations, is to create an effect.

All right. Find the thing on which you're really going to create an effect. If another thetan never, never, never can receive a motivator, you're going to get somebody anxious after a while about creating an effect. He knows no real effect can be created upon himself, except as he considers it and agrees.

All right. Find the thing on which you're really going to create an effect. If another thetan never, never, never can receive a motivator, you're going to get somebody anxious after a while about creating an effect. He knows no real effect can be created upon himself, except as he considers it and agrees.

Therefore, he knows actually, basically, intrinsically that he can create no effect upon another thetan and, therefore, must consider life units as solids. The second he begins to consider them thetans, he gets very upset. And thus people turn away from Scientology. They like Dianetics. They like all these studies. But you've made them face the idea of an exteriorized being who cannot be reached, struck or harmed. You're telling this fellow he cannot create an effect.

Therefore, he knows actually, basically, intrinsically that he can create no effect upon another thetan and, therefore, must consider life units as solids. The second he begins to consider them thetans, he gets very upset. And thus people turn away from Scientology. They like Dianetics. They like all these studies. But you've made them face the idea of an exteriorized being who cannot be reached, struck or harmed. You're telling this fellow he cannot create an effect.

So he's caught between trying to create an effect and, the moment when he has apparently created an effect, of then being guilty of an unmotivated act. So he counteropposes his effort to create an effect against the fact that one must never indulge in unmotivated acts.

So he's caught between trying to create an effect and, the moment when he has apparently created an effect, of then being guilty of an unmotivated act. So he counteropposes his effort to create an effect against the fact that one must never indulge in unmotivated acts.

And all he had to do to get messed up — he was trying to create an effect, you see, trying to create an effect — was to discover that he was capable of harm, of harming others. And when this was beautifully defined for him, good and evil, or he's defined them for himself, or he's defined them for some-body else, so forth — however that got into the run ... It got in there very easily, actually: he had to make up his mind about it and then afterwards agree to it.

And all he had to do to get messed up — he was trying to create an effect, you see, trying to create an effect — was to discover that he was capable of harm, of harming others. And when this was beautifully defined for him, good and evil, or he's defined them for himself, or he's defined them for some-body else, so forth — however that got into the run ... It got in there very easily, actually: he had to make up his mind about it and then afterwards agree to it.

Then, and thereafter, you would have him becoming more and more solid, and departing further and further from truth because he's trying to justify his actions. He's trying to justify all these unmotivated acts. And his effort to justify them would result in a chaotic state where he was concerned, and his whole past track would be composited almost entirely of hallucination.

Then, and thereafter, you would have him becoming more and more solid, and departing further and further from truth because he's trying to justify his actions. He's trying to justify all these unmotivated acts. And his effort to justify them would result in a chaotic state where he was concerned, and his whole past track would be composited almost entirely of hallucination.

Your extreme case is always packing around huge masses of energy. The amount of energy a person is packing around with him, and his own state of sanity — beingness — are directly proportional. The insane pack the most in-credible quantities of facsimiles — nearly all of them mocked up. They're justifiers.

Your extreme case is always packing around huge masses of energy. The amount of energy a person is packing around with him, and his own state of sanity — beingness — are directly proportional. The insane pack the most in-credible quantities of facsimiles — nearly all of them mocked up. They're justifiers.

Now, a mocked-up facsimile — in other words, a picture that didn't hap-pen which a person thinks happened — is a justifier. A justifier is a facsimile of something which never occurred.

Now, a mocked-up facsimile — in other words, a picture that didn't hap-pen which a person thinks happened — is a justifier. A justifier is a facsimile of something which never occurred.

Your preclear sits there and chatters at you madly: "Oh, my mother did this to me. My mother did that to me. My mother did something else to me. Yap-yap-yap-yap-yap-yap." You know what this person is trying to do now, don't you? This person is trying to mock up justifiers in the process of the communication.

Your preclear sits there and chatters at you madly: "Oh, my mother did this to me. My mother did that to me. My mother did something else to me. Yap-yap-yap-yap-yap-yap." You know what this person is trying to do now, don't you? This person is trying to mock up justifiers in the process of the communication.

Well, one immediate way to handle this, which is intensely effective and one of the most devastating and violent processes I know, is have him sit there and mock up or outline or list things his mother could do to him.

Well, one immediate way to handle this, which is intensely effective and one of the most devastating and violent processes I know, is have him sit there and mock up or outline or list things his mother could do to him.

"Things that anything could do to him on the seventh dynamic" is the process. And you simply ask the individual to sit there and mock these up. Of course, this is a type of processing which comes close to remedying of havingness. And it belongs under Remedy of Havingness, of course.

"Things that anything could do to him on the seventh dynamic" is the process. And you simply ask the individual to sit there and mock these up. Of course, this is a type of processing which comes close to remedying of havingness. And it belongs under Remedy of Havingness, of course.

You just have him mock up things, or have him list things, that all dynamics have done to him.

You just have him mock up things, or have him list things, that all dynamics have done to him.

In other words, "That you've done to yourself"; that sex has done to him (sexual partners, in other words: women, if he's a man; men, if she's a woman); that groups have done to him; that mankind or other species have done to him; that animals have done to him; that the physical universe, that space has done to him; that energy has done to him — just keep talking, you see, mocking these things up, or simply listing them for you, and just plain remedy that scarcity of justifiers. Of course, you take in spirits and God too, you know. And your preclear, having remedied his scarcity of justifiers, will be well. This is the most single powerful process I know.

In other words, "That you've done to yourself"; that sex has done to him (sexual partners, in other words: women, if he's a man; men, if she's a woman); that groups have done to him; that mankind or other species have done to him; that animals have done to him; that the physical universe, that space has done to him; that energy has done to him — just keep talking, you see, mocking these things up, or simply listing them for you, and just plain remedy that scarcity of justifiers. Of course, you take in spirits and God too, you know. And your preclear, having remedied his scarcity of justifiers, will be well. This is the most single powerful process I know.

Right next door to it is have him spot — you know, Remedy of Havingness and Spot Spots in Space; well, this is the background process of those two processes — have him spot all the spots where himself or anyone else considered harm could or had been done.

Right next door to it is have him spot — you know, Remedy of Havingness and Spot Spots in Space; well, this is the background process of those two processes — have him spot all the spots where himself or anyone else considered harm could or had been done.

Actually, the technique is given in R2-61 of the Auditor's Handbook, printed edition, and the technique of overt acts and motivators is given in R2-62 of the printed edition of the Auditor's Handbook.

Actually, the technique is given in R2-61 of the Auditor's Handbook, printed edition, and the technique of overt acts and motivators is given in R2-62 of the printed edition of the Auditor's Handbook.

Okay.

Okay.