Okay. And this is the afternoon lecture of January the 19th.

And this is January the 19th, 1954, first morning lecture.

And then I wanted to tell you about this chap (a very interesting case) who said, “Auditing would be all right if it weren’t for people and thetans.” [laughter] Well, it’s very interesting that people really don’t have to worry about people, but people don’t know this, so people worry about people. It’s quite remarkable that the individual is his own communication index in terms of hate and resentment and fear and so forth.

I want to give you a very rapid summary of the elements of the theory which you are supposed to know. It’s very simple and you have had an awful lot of data.

How well do you think a ridge flows? Doesn’t flow very good. It’ll flow to another ridge- I mean, you’ve got a terminal in operation, you see that?

Well, I like to go at this data every once in a while by giving you the central pins of this data to show what we’re walking out from, because we are walking out from a held citadel, you might say. And this goes into this: knowingness-just knowingness. The fact that knowingness is not data and that knowingness is the top echelon, that knowingness is that which we’re trying to achieve. And confidence, competence, certainty and all the rest of these things stem out of knowingness and these things are similar to knowingness.

So we get, in interpersonal relations, practically no danger in anybody below 3.0, the truth be told, unless you pay attention to them and agree that they’re very dangerous. And if you start fighting this kind of danger, which is what they want you to do, you wind up with a tendency toward their level of the Tone Scale.

Philosophy was not without good sense when it studied knowingness and it was with very, very bad sense when it departed from a study of knowingness. If you will read in philosophy, you will find that the main lines of philosophy make knowingness only one compartment and they cover that under epistemology. And right next to epistemology, they talk about ontology and they talk about rah-rahology and blah-blahology, bub-bubbology and yap-yapogy and it goes right on down the line. But they don’t put knowingness first, last or anything else. And yet, every philosopher there is, is simply trying to know or trying to tell people what he doesn’t know. And if they’d put epistemology up there and made a study out of it, they would have gotten somewhere with philosophy.

Now, the mission of duplication is to duplicate and make everybody else duplicate and duplicate and duplicate and duplicate-let’s all go nuts. To duplicate or not to duplicate, that is the hang-up on the time track.

Funny part of it is, they didn’t get anyplace. There have been an awful lot of things said by philosophers, but somebody said one time, “There is nothing so absurd as cannot be found in the books of philosophers.”

So we get a ridge flowing to a ridge and we’ve got a little bit of current. But what do you know, the current is going between those two ridges and in terms of electronics, you even need a wire to get it away from those two ridges and you need a wire to get it between those two, really, if they’re very far apart.

The entire field of philosophy is actually a study of knowingness. And when we depart from that, why, we depart from anything sensible. We immediately depart from things that are sensible. We get into Kant’s transcendentalism and where “Everything that is worth knowing is above the realm of human experience, so why try, you little pup, you?” That was just about his attitude, too-1792-put the brakes on almost any reasonable endeavor in the field of philosophy, I suppose because he’d made it so ridiculous that nobody else wanted to be associated with it.

So we find hate not going very far. You talk about this horrible poison called hate and how you don’t want anybody to hate you. Go ahead and let them hate. You’ll just hang them up on a ridge. And a ridge can’t communicate unless you mock yourself up as a ridge. It can communicate to that.

You take Zeno’s Apatheia-let’s go way back in philosophy and we find out that Zeno wrote a little book called Apatheia. And he was very popular, he was one of the most popular men in the later Roman Empire days-fine, fine fellow. His philosophy went this way: “You can’t win anyway, so why try?” That’s right, that was the most favorite philosophy of the later Roman Empire.

Throughout the history of Man, the fighting of low-tonedness has inevitably, invariably, wound up with low-tonedness.

And then we get to Schopenhauer and Schopenhauer is ramming around saying, “Well, there’s only one way to defeat it and that’s quit. Refuse to procreate, just go on and die, die quick, then you’ll defeat the whole thing and then it will have lost.” We do this double take on this and we find that he’s over into some other compartment.

Now, there’s a couple of ants out here, live on McDowell Street. And these ants live just back of the curb. And they hate every automobile that goes by. Boy, do they hate them! And, you know, there hasn’t been a single flat tire because of that. That’s because it doesn’t occur to any motorist to fight the hate of ants. Just doesn’t occur to them. Of course, now if you went down and told every motorist, just before he went by the place, that there were two ants up the line there and they hated them, you’d probably get a line charge.

And here we go, left and right, and we get on up-the only fellow that really ever said anything sensible in this field that amounted to anything was Herbert Spencer. And Spencer said, “Well, there’s the knowable and the unknowable and we’ll take off from there.” In other words, he introduced the compartmentation of problems. And we are rather indebted to Herbert Spencer for his method of approaching a problem rather than anything else. Then he went ahead and he wrote a formula which is not very workable.

This is why you can’t get an Operating Thetan to take anything serious that is an international problem. And he can’t believe that the hate of ants is going to ruin him. And honest, that sounds awfully superior and snobbish and all that sort of thing, but it would be if it were in any of those categories. But, you see, it’s not in any of those categories, because it just isn’t an assigned problem. They can’t get into the frame of reference that it’s a desperate thing that they ought to do something or other. They’ll do something because it’s dramatic, not because it’s necessary.

But there is no such thing in philosophy as “not very workable.” Things either work or they don't work. I mean, let’s make an Aristotelian problem out of this and say that there’s black and white, yes and no, two values-let’s crunch on the thing and just be arbitrary as the dickens and see if we don’t come up with something and sure enough we do, we do come up with something. We find that Man is trying to climb the ladder of knowingness and he has tried to climb it by philosophy and he’s tried to climb it by mysticism and spiritualism and “this-is-this-is-ism” and “that-is-isms.” But the final analysis demonstrates that he has made his greatest progresses in the field of knowingness alone. He has done modus operandi, you might say, on this MEST universe and all things are actually secondary to his knowledge of this universe-just as a purity, not as a knowledge of data. Science itself is a knowledge, it’s a classified knowledge. And when we attack the problem with knowingness there at its highest echelon, we get solutions.

The number of necessities which come about in Man are few, as long as he’s here on Earth remotely doing some kind of a job, floundering around-he’ll get there, one way or the other. Mostly he’ll go on down and around and wars will come and wars will go. The only thing that’s really objectionable about Man: that he’s bored. There’s not much drama connected with Man. Nearly all of his drama is in his storybooks or on the television screen. There’s not much drama there. The only real trouble with a war is hurrying up to wait. That’s the only real trouble with a war.

And so it is that we can take “know” and “not-know” and no matter how crudely, run them out of the preclear, we get him exteriorized. You got that? I mean, if we just turn around and take what we’ve already learned about philosophy and so forth and we just apply it straight to the preclear, we find out that immediately, crunch, we can exteriorize him if we specialize and just come down with a hard hand on know and not-know with the preclear.

And when we talk about counter-emotion, it’s a very, very happy thing that the counter-emotions which are the most dangerous are the type that can’t emanate. Because, by definition, there is less emanation in them.

Now, if you’re looking for fancy techniques that will slide somebody surreptitiously out of his coco, you’re not going to have to look any further than that, because it will do it.

Let’s take Fear, Now, if you get everybody more or less at a tone level which approaches Fear and they’re being suppressed this way and that way and they have to be afraid of an awful lot of things, they have to go on resisting an awful lot of things, they go floundering around with a lot of things, well, what do we have there? We have a mass agreement which is ready to trigger into a tone level which it is very near. And so, we get mass hysteria and stories of mass hysteria, or mass fear, in such places as the cotton mills of the South.

I took a case that had been stumbling, stumbling, stumbling-going out and getting in, and effort and tin-cupping and tricky methods of exteriorization and finally I just made him Match Terminal “don’t know,” “I didn’t know.” “Match Terminal the first time you discovered you didn't-know something and back and forth, all kinds of bric-a-brac on the subject of not-knowingness. All of his operations turned up in a jump-he didn’t know what happened during them. All of the puzzles that he had run concerning this MEST universe and its composition turned up and went poof! And with it went his fear. I exteriorized him, he exteriorized very stably with full perception. A very short time before that he’d been a completely black case.

A girl is frightened by a mouse or something, lets out a piercing scream and all the girls in the factory promptly start screaming. Now, here you have this manifestation of mass hysteria. You’ll find this recounted and very, very badly reported, in tremendous numbers of psychological textbooks. Mass hysteria. It must be important, one way or the other, or it wouldn’t be duplicated so often, according to MEST universe logic.

All right.

Well, if it is that important, why, we ought to know something about it. If we have a number of individuals on the verge of something, then it is easy to trigger them into the something, isn’t it? But if they’re along distance from the something, they don’t trigger into it.

Therefore, if we say that certainty and knowingness are themselves synonyms, if we can approach knowingness by saying it is certainty, we find out that the greatest mechanism that has ever been used against Man is to introduce uncertainty into his knowingness.

Now, it’s very hard to fall in a well when you’re five miles from the well. That’s communication distance. But, in tone, it would be very hard to fall into Fear if you were in Serenity. Same kind of drop-five miles away-only it isn’t in distance, it’s in difference of state of mind. But it’s very easy to fall into Anger if you’re in Resentment. It’s very easy to fall into Fear if you’re in Anger.

Therefore, we have a direct index for any individual as to what he considers his relative knowingness should be-not what his knowingness is, what his relative knowingness should be. He thinks his relative knowingness should be tremendous and his certainty is terrible, you know? That’s because he’s got to know so much and his certainty is terrible.

We get some other guy and we drag him out from behind a plow in one of the more barbaric tribes of Iowa and he does know what a clod is, it’s something you hop. And we say, “Be three feet back of your head” and pang he does with perfect certainty. This guy is idiotically certain of the darnedest things, but he has no horizon of knowingness.

It’s quite amazing that Hitler was so afraid of spirits. Yeah, he was all messed up with the Seventh Dynamic. And he would go into spasms of terror which approximated the magnitude of his anger. It was inevitable, just on a basis of electronics, that anybody who is in that much of a ridge, when he disperses that much, will of course go to the next lower dispersal.

And we get some other fellow that’s eighteen thousand times the guy and ninety thousand times as valuable and we say, “Be three feet back of your head” and he says, “What head?” Well, he knows there’s so much more to know-the essential difference between these two people and it breaks down to certainty. So, knowingness itself becomes a relative problem and, as such, should be more understandable to you.

See, the mechanical aspect of this: fellow is riding a ridge, he starts to communicate, he can communicate just so long and he finds himself, of course, in Terror. You should understand this because you’ll see preclears doing it on the way up and occasionally, when you drop them in tone, on the way down. They hit a ridge and then they hit a dispersal and then they hit a ridge and they hit a dispersal and so forth.

A fellow can go into the field of butterflies and suddenly realize that he doesn’t know anything about the field of butterflies. Nothing wrong with this, but he can move right on into the field of butterflies and know something about the field of butterflies. But the first day or so that he’s in the field of butterflies, he’s the most uncertain of guys. He doesn’t know a Lepidoptera from an Aphrodite. His uncertainty is magnified many times, so he’s quite uncertain.

Well, every time you hit a ridge, you get somebody solid and not communicating. So you’ll mark hitting these ridges by hitting the comm lags. And the ordinary course up the Tone Scale of a preclear is not by jumps, it’s just marching right on up the Tone Scale.

Now, that’s data-knowingness. It is more important to have the potentiality of knowing than it is to have the datum. These two things are quite significant in any case. Cases which have a tremendous potentiality of knowing are generally balked by society, not by blows but by denial of knowledge.

And if he’s not going on up the Tone Scale, you’re not doing a good job of auditing. You’re just not paying attention to certainty and to fundamentals, as we covered this morning. It’s almost impossible to keep him from going up the Tone Scale on the material which you have. It’s real hard to do. You have to be awful careful the way you use the stuff, because if you use it in any vague sort of a routine job on the thing, the fellow will eventually go up the Tone Scale. You pay attention to certainty, he’ll go up the Tone Scale.

Some fellow thinks that if he went to the university and learned about a great many things, then he would be a very educated man and he’d be very knowing. Well, he might be a very smart fellow and he goes on up to the time he’s fifty years of age knowing that he’s not smart, because he didn’t go to the university. This is an idiocy of itself. What he doesn’t know is that in the university they don’t know. He has taken the assumption that someplace, somewhere, somebody knows.

All right. What do we do, then, about these communication changes? What’s this 7 communication change all about? Well, outflow, outflow, inflow, inflow and of course you get this sort of a problem. At each point of this scale, one way or the other, flows are imbalanced. And ridges are of different densities.

All right.

Now, you’re not trying to run out a flock of flows or a bunch of ridges. You’re trying to get the individual up to a security where this particular type of ridge does not trouble him. Therefore, Straightwire is a better technique than any plow-horse technique. Because all you’re trying to do with a thetan is change his mind-wherever you will see him, wherever yOu’ll find him, outside or inside, all you’re trying to do is change his mind.

Looking at this field of knowingness again, we find something very, very interesting about Units such as yourself. And we wouldn’t even approach this problem if we couldn’t solve it, you see? Your cases flounder along for the first couple, three, sometimes even four weeks. You’ve just entered the field of butterflies and you don’t know a Lepidoptera from an Aphrodite. And you feel then that you don’t know and that there’s a lot of not-knowingness in the air. See this? And so you have a less certain aspect for existence during that early period than you would ordinarily.

Interiorized, he’s got himself connected with the body to a point where he tries to change the body’s mind as well as his own mind at the same time. This sympathy with the (quote) “body’s mind” (unquote) and his own mind, results in the fact that he thinks he has to change the body’s mind before he can change his own mind.

Any one of yous’ cases, of course, would progress far better if you weren’t entering a not-knowingness problem. But what do you know? Just as the fellow who enters the field of butterflies can know about butterflies and finally becomes the cockiest fellow you ever saw-somebody points out and says, “That’s an Anistopholese.”

Well, this is very difficult to do in view of the fact that the command-post center that the body uses from the motor controls isn’t a mind. So it’s quite hard to change the mind of something that doesn’t have a mind. But the thetan has put a very complex mind sitting there in the body-he’s got this all rigged up and there are beautiful circuit machines and so forth. So when you try to audit somebody who is inside the body, you spend most of your time auditing him so he will audit the thing which he has set up which represents the body’s mind, which he is also in sympathy with.

And he says, “I’m very sorry, that’s an Aphrodite.”

So we get this very circuitous type of auditing. You’re auditing somebody who is auditing something. You’re not auditing a preclear. You see, you’re auditing an auditor of a preclear. Well, a preclear is normally a flock of circuits or something. He’ll sit there and audit demon circuits like mad and all that sort of thing. Well, how do you get away from this? Well, nobody ever audited out a demon circuit and went anyplace but down in tone. You reduced his havingness, in other words.

And we get an immediate result then, through what? Through having tackled the field o£ butterflies and brought himself through to a confidence about the data of butterflies.

Well, the more effort and seriousness there is about his handling this problem, of course, the harder it is for him to handle the problem because you’ve suppressed him toward the effort band. And when you set in to do a tremendously serious job of auditing and it has a great deal of concern in it, your preclear is trying to duplicate you to some degree, and goes on being very, very concerned. You see that? Whereas, you could boost him up to a point where he’d be less concerned.

Now, that’s just in the field of data, you understand that?

Well, if a preclear has a serious problem, you can just bet your boots that it’s got some heavy flows connected with it. Well, the way for you to handle this is to put him into a condition where he can handle flows, ridges and energy and so forth and the spaces that are interwoven with them. So it’s of the essence-because these things have spaces, too-it’s of the essence that your preclear be able to handle space, energy, time-those three things. If he can’t handle those three things, why, he won’t be able to handle a reactive bank, because it’s composed of nothing else.

All right. Let’s get the difference, then, between your case as it progresses in this Unit and the case of the preclear which you process in a Clinic somewhere. He walks in off the street, you process him-three feet back of his head-he goes off and he’s very happy about life. And you don’t spend too much time with him. He finds out a lot of things, he thinks about a lot of things, he’s in pretty good shape.

And you say, “Gee whiz. I wish my case would run like that.”

Nothing wrong with lying, except when it’s the truth. And the GE runs backwards and everything is so true that the more lies he gets in place, the truer it gets and then you tell somebody to face reality. And he faces a flock of data based on what the GE is doing.

Well, you’re a slightly different breed of cat or you wouldn’t be here. That’s the long and short of it.

The more a person agrees with the past, of course (theoretically, the more he thinks the past is there and necessary and he has to agree with it at all times), the more enforced agreement you’re liable to have on the case. And you get this problem of psychotherapy always processing the past.

Your potential knowingness or thirst for knowingness must be much greater than that fellow you pulled in off the street. Must be. And to Clear you, “Be three feet back of your head,” get certainty, get perception, that’s all very well. Yes, that would increase your potential of knowingness, that would boost you way on up the line and leave you without any assembled data. And then what would you do? You’d start to run the same dwindling spiral that you got into when you first got into the dwindling spiral. And it’s a spiral of not-knowingness.

Now, the only reason I’m trying to talk to you about this at all is trying to get you out 10 of the idea of thinking the past is important. It is more important to teach your preclear to tell good, big, believable, unbelievable, baldfaced lies than it is to teach him how to tell the inescapable truth of what “everybody knows happened.”

You start ramming around, you run into a theta trap. What the hell is this? Never heard of this. But isn’t that music beautiful? And here you go. And you aren’t amongst our ranks anymore. Cute, huh? You’re wiser than most.

Now, that sounds like it’s immoral or unethical. No. It is very, very immoral and unethical to make a man agree with the actual incidents which have taken place. Very immoral. Because it’ll kill him. And that’s the only reason he dies. He dies out of these things called “truth of actual occurrence.”

There’s the fellow who has great courage but still wants to know before he goes. Now, when you get into this theta trap, why, you say, “Oh, it’s a theta trap-it’s a pole-type theta trap, what do you know? Ha-ha! What do you know, pole-type theta trap.”

These are data truths, see? Actual occurrence. These are agreed-upon truths and these aren’t truths at all. A number of people could get out front and agree perfectly that this was not a house here, that it was a black cat.

“All right. Be three feet back of the theta trap.”

And the next guy that comes up, they could say to him, “Now look at that black cat.”

“Okay.”

And the fellow looks at them and he says, “What’s the matter with you people? That’s a house. That isn’t a black cat!”

“All right. Now, I’ll put a spot of beingness three feet above the theta trap.” “Now grant beingness to it very heavily.” “Now be it.”

And they say, “Yes, it is a black cat.” Pow!

“Well, this theta trap sure looks funny from up here.”

And after they’d beaten him up enough and given him enough energy and impacts and certainties and various categories and arguments, in other words, he, too, will tell you, “It’s a black cat.” Furthermore, he’ll be able to feel the fur on that cat and hear it purr.

You’re not up against a wall of unknowingness. If you’re going to continue to live in this universe, you have to have a lot of its data. Well, several of you have already adventured out and snapped back in and so forth, because of what? No more, no less, you ran into something that was strange and apparently, as far as you were concerned, quite unknowable. All right.

Now, I don’t recommend that you should make this experiment daily. But it’s how you got that way.

So let’s just cut this problem across and realize that we’re not-while we are almost the same as studying butterflies, we’re actually tackling the problem at the darnedest level that anybody ever tried to tackle this problem, which is just simply this: The total mechanics of livingness. I’m not saying we’re attacking it there, we’re trying to attack it theremechanics of livingness.

“Well, you see that over there? That’s a mouse.”

Now, there’s several holes in what we know. Let’s not blind ourselves to the fact that there still exist certain holes.

“No, it isn’t a mouse. A mouse is only an inch high. I know what a mouse is. Where we come from, the thing we call a mouse is only an inch high. That’s what a mouse is.”

We do not know, absolutely for sure, that the MEST universe is being placed there as an automaticity. This we do not know for sure. Everything seems to incline to that, demonstrably, but we don’t have a final proof of this. It doesn’t happen to matter if you can handle the MEST universe. Because if you can handle the MEST universe-that is to say, if you can go through a mountain without getting stuck and if you can have a couple of mountains fall on your body and yet go out and make or get another body without much disturbance, certainly the MEST universe doesn’t kind of get to be the big problem it was. And if you can materialize at a far distance, why, the problem of distance itself doesn’t become the bone crusher which it always was. You see that?

“Oh, no. That isn’t what a mouse is. That mile-high thing over there is a mouse.” “No, it’s not a mouse! It isn’t even an animal. It isn’t even a . . .”

So that the final point in that will turn up someday. Someday we will know for sure whether or not-absolute certain-we make it! Or absolutely certain, “My God, there was a fellow named God after all and he’s sitting up on Planet Eight.” See? I mean, it’ll be that type of answer. It won’t be a bunch of balderdash which we stir up and mix up and so forth.

“It’s a mouse.”

But that is knowingness in a category of data. Now, when we get potential knowingness, we get how much spread is this fellow willing to take on in terms of how big? In other words, how much knowingness does this fellow conceive to be knowingness, potentially? And that would be area knowingness, which is to say, he knows everything that’s going on in this entire solar system or he knows everything that’s going on, on 42nd and Broadway. See, an area of knowingness. Now, he’s got just this little area or this big area and the next fellow comes along and he isn’t satisfied unless he’s got the whole potential of knowingness of the entire MEST universe from end to end and what everybody’s got in his pocket on every planet, see? Now, that’s his potential of knowingness.

“Well, now look, I have my own rights to my . ..” Pow!

So, he goes into area knowingness and he adds to that data knowingness. But he might be carrying along wonderfully with potential knowingness and his potential knowingness might be very great, but because of data knowingness-you see, absence of data knowingness-potential knowingness great and the absence of data knowingness great, too, so we get him uncertain.

“It’s a mouse. Well, I guess around here they believe that mice are a mile high. Well, I have to agree with it in order to live with them. Every time I say mouse, I mean something an inch high and every time they say mouse, it means a mile high. Well, I guess we just better talk about a mouse that’s a mile high. I’ll kind of remember that mice are one inch high.”

This is, again, relative knowingnesses.

A few years later, he doesn’t remember that mice are an inch high and he goes back home again.

Now, if you’re going to play a game, it’s a good thing to know all the rules. The MEST universe is a game consisting of barriers. And when you get all the rules assembled as the rules are and as they exist, of course, you can play a much better game.

Somebody runs out of the house and says, “There’s a mouse in the house.”

Did you ever run into a football player who didn’t know any of the rules of football who played a good game of football? Well, you never ran into a football player who didn’t know the rules of football in the first place. But the next thing we would get to that is a spectator of a baseball game who didn’t know anything about baseball. It’s a kind of a silly-looking hodgepodge to him.

He says, “That’s impossible.” [laughter]

Well, imagine being a player in a baseball game and not knowing any of the rules of baseball. Boy, you would be impressed every split second of the entire nine innings with your complete unknowingness. You’d finish up those nine innings feeling the most stupid person that you ever heard of but maybe with a little hope.

“No, it’s not impossible. There is a mouse in the house.”

And that’s approximately what you’ve been doing, life by life by life. You see, you play the nine innings and then wind up with a little hope: “Well, maybe next time.” And each one is very convincing that you don’t know the rules, because somebody is always inventing some new rules or some more rules that they say are the rules. And the entire passion of other players in this particular game is “hide the rules.” Science has the single virtue of being a game called “find the rules.”

“Well, look, that house is only fifty feet high. It can’t possibly be, because a mouse is a mile high.”

So, where we get a little boggy is just on this knowingness. But remember, perforce then, we must be making a different type of Clear out of you. It’s not that the state will be any lower eventually or it’ll be any higher. As far as this guy in Iowa; you see, you pop him out of his head and he’s perfectly Clear and he can do all sorts of things. He doesn’t know how he’s doing them and that’s the big hole that would be left all the way along the line in his processing.

“Oh, you think a mouse is a mile high, huh?” Pow!

Now, don’t mistake it, you’ve made him better than anybody has ever been made better. So it’s no small gain that you’ve made there, but how about you?

So he gets convinced the other way.

All right, by the time you get out of your head thoroughly, completely, with a tremendous certainty and have nothing left kicking around inside the body that you’re still trying to hold on to and no old mock-ups that you’re trying to hide from you and this and that and so on, you’ve got a terrifically clean vista. You are the thing which has never occurred before: a wise thetan. And so it takes just a few weeks longer to make a wise thetan than it does just a Clear.

Now, he only gets convinced to the degree that he can be mobbed up on or manhandled.

Now, here’s what we’re up against, then. We’re up against knowing a bit before we go. It is actually a different type of clearing. You’ll run into this when you’re training people. You’ve just shown them all the things they didn’t know and then you say, “Be three feet back of your head.”

Now we’re not talking, now, about any legal trickery or anything of the sort, we’re just talking about being manhandled: hit with energy, having his space condensed, having things pulled away from him, have him being mauled, mobbed, kicked around, booed at and so forth. That’s all we’re talking about. I mean violence.

And they say, “What fog?” You see that? All right.

It takes violence to really make these things stick. So God help the individual the first moment he ceased to be dangerous to the environment and the first moment the environment started really being dangerous to him. These are two (quote) “frames of mind” (unquote). Am I dangerous to my environment or is my environment dangerous to me?

Theoretically you could approach this on the basis: as the person comes in, you just merely assume that he knows everything there is to know and you convince him that he knows everything there is to know and that he has the answers to everything. You can say, “Be three feet back of your head,” he would be.

If you’re dangerous to the environment, then your engram bank is in danger from you, without you thinking any more about it. But, if your environment is simply dangerous to you, then your engram bank, being part of your environment, is dangerous to you, too.

Only trouble is, he wouldn’t have the answers to everything, because we have, again, at least two kinds of knowledge. We have data and then we just have knowingness-ability to know. But don’t mistake it. The ability to know a datum goes through the route of finding out.

Now, we say engram bank, we have a misnomer. So let’s shift it over and call it a reactive mind. And let’s find out that that’s made up of automatic machinery and it wasn’t lying there in neat, quiet piles of pictures. Let’s get a different sort of a thing. Let’s get an idea of it being boiler rooms and machinery and perpetually producing stuff and with tax collectors that take your energy away from you to make itself run. That’s more what a reactive mind looks like.

Now, you’ve been looking for “spontaneous prefrontalizing” whereby you suddenly and completely know all the data that there is to be known about livingness. Well, it’s possible to do that, but it’s unfortunate that you never will. It’s too much fun finding out. And if you lost the game of finding out totally and completely, you would feel pretty lost, see? We always put a little more horizon.

As far as the analytical mind is concerned, that’s slightly a misnomer because it isn’t analytical-it knows. And you don’t know, because you’re analytical. But by analytical, we’ve departed a little bit in words and we meant “conscious”-you know, more conscious.

Now, if knowingness is the top echelon, then you always would like to croche just a little bit further into knowingness so that you get up to potential knowingness. I can tell you in a breath what potential knowingness is: potential knowingness is that there’s nothing. And when you’d know that with entire certainty, you would be a very, very, very wise person with not a damn thing to do. The ardures you go through to convince yourself there is something is, in itself, the game called MEST universe.

Well, this is the self-determined mind of the individual, versus the stimulus-response determined mind of the individual. What are these two minds? One is the guy and the other is the machinery.

So, we’re getting there. But we’re getting there on a much higher level of certainty because we’re getting there in terms of modus operand! as well as just beingness.

Well, now let’s take up the winning valence. Every once in a while, you process a preclear and he all of a sudden has a stuck visio of a bathroom or a stuck visio of a bedroom. You haven’t any idea why he’s got this stuck visio of the bedroom. You inquire into it on the standpoint of valences, however, and make him look around a little bit, he’s liable to find his body there. He isn’t in his body, he’s looking at the room from the standpoint of the bedpost. Why is he looking at it from the standpoint of the bedpost? Because the bedpost just won. He barked his shins against it and it hurt him like hell and he couldn’t punish it, so it won. For an instant he was the bedpost.

So when you step down one space from knowingness, you can get a beingness. There’s nothing cockier, for instance, than a six-months-old pup. He has elected to be a terrifically cocky, confident character. And he goes around and he’ll fight with any dog, he’ll walk up to anybody to be petted, he will eat anything.

It’s very shockingly true that an individual has a tendency to shift into the identities of those things which win and this is his effort to become dangerous to his environment. He becomes dangerous to his environment to the degree that (he believes) he takes on identities of things which are dangerous to their environments.

Well, you look at this character and, as a matter of fact, a little bit of nostalgic sadness always comes over you because you know very well what this state is, since you pretend to it every time you hit that age. And you know how many guys are going to boot him in the skull before he’s very much older and how many meals are going to disagree with him. But the nostalgia is, is look at all the fun he’s going to have finding out.

We get the subject of butterflies again and we’ll have the most ferocious looking patterns on the wings of butterflies. And these patterns all demonstrate to the world that the butterfly would be awfully hard to attack. The butterfly is operating on a winning valence proposition. Nothing dangerous about this butterfly at all, but he takes on a pattern of some dangerous thing. See that? That’s simply winning valence.

Therefore, data becomes at once happy material and regretted material. Now, when we cover this subject from that standpoint, when we cover a person from a standpoint such as that, a great clarity of what we are trying to do, a certain singleness of purpose, immediately emerges in our work.

Well, there’s hardly a preclear alive who, as he came down the track, didn’t skid into one of his automatic machines and be it, leaving himself to go to hell. Because his automatic machinery, one after the other, are apt to become winning valences.

The human mind was a storage vessel and computer for knowledge—Dianetics: Modern Science of Mental Health. You know, it didn’t say it was knowledge. The thetan is himself knowledge. We’re closer to it, you see? So that we fulfill the goals of Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health, we know the anatomy of the human mind, as a human mind. You’re no longer working in the human mind, although occasionally you think you are. You’re working in the high level of knowingness of the thetan. And, of course, his potentiality of knowingness is total.

And so it is that many a preclear who goes into auditing gets pushed over into the “automatic doctoring machine.” See that? “Automatic doctoring machine,” the “automatic healing machine” or the “automatic memory machine.” Each one of these things has beingness and so he can be them. They have beingness, he granted them beingness-you can make any number of individuals that you want to. You can make as many chess players as you want to make chess boards. No finite number. And so you could make a tremendous amount of machinery that itself has identity. And then, if you lose your own identity one way or the other, you can always be a machine.

As you get up the line, you’ll have a harder time keeping yourself from knowing something than you will otherwise. For instance, every once in a while somebody gives me a wrapped-up present. I just have to construct a box around it and put an enormous piece of black space inside of it. I have to actually do a flinch and opaque the box in order not to know what’s in it. And then I open it up and I’m so surprised. But, of course, there’s always a little tiny lock shows up on it earlier. It’s just the instant that black space was going on there, of course, I saw it, so that had to be occluded. Well, that blows when I open up the package.

Memory, let’s take memory. Memory is that thing which is supposed to give back former incidents to you. In other words, it’s an automatic pound-in mechanism. Well, that’s all right as a mechanism. “This is supposed to give me back incidents when I think of them. This is supposed to give me the incidents which have happened and so that they will then reoccur to me, so that I can have the incidents which I have lost in the past.” This is one way of beating the past, is memory.

Thetan is always doing this sort of thing. You have a little tiny black box or something of the sort and he’s got it all rigged up that when he opens it, boy, will he be surprised. And a lot of your preclears have stashed all around their anatomy, you might say, these little boxes and little hampers and junk-just junk. They’re afraid they’ll get bored someday and they’ll have this stuff to open and, boy, will they be surprised! As a matter of fact, that’s one of the drills of 8-0: teaching a fellow how to surprise himself.

So one sets up a machine to do this and then what do you know? He’s in a universe that pounds him from 360 degrees, so this inflow is aided and abetted by MEST universe inflow. So here he is being pounded from all sides by inflow and he’s also got a machine which inflows the past at him.

Well, when we get on the level of what we are doing and integrate from that level, we find that Dianetics: Modern Science of Mental Health, the mind was the vessel and computer of knowledge. All right, if it was the vessel and computer of knowledge, why, then we were studying a vessel and computer and so we did study a vessel and computer. And we know pretty much-practically all there is to know about that vessel and computer, weirdly enough. I mean, in terms of theory and practice, you can do an awful lot of fabulous things with that vessel and computer, using, you know, most any of the technologies which we have. Whether it stays that way or not is actually beside the point. We can cause an effect.

An auditor quite often becomes an automatic memory machine. His own identity was pretty shaky and so he just decides to be an automatic memory machine for the preclear.

How does this machine operate? Well, some of these machines are quite complex. They present pictures to the thetan. The thetan remembers something and then the automatic memory machine presents him with a picture. This is only one method of an automatic memory machine. They also present him with a thought. So you get associative logic. I don’t know what’s so logical about it, but it’s sure associative.

We have knowingness, then, as the top echelon of what we’re trying to do and the Ц synonyms for it are confidence, certainty, competence. But as we introduce these other words, we introduce other facets of knowingness. Now, let’s take competence. Competence is no more than this: it is the ability to predict or move into line and predict the new position or new consecutive positions of two particles. That’s competence.

Then you get individuals who don’t want to be reminded of things. They don’t like things because they remind them of other things. Don’t want to be reminded. Don’t want to be reminded. And they’ve got an automatic memory machine that is set up to do just this: remind them.

If you don’t believe that’s competence, go through this simple drill sometime: Drive your car out on a flat somewhere where there’s a lot of desert-you know, a lot of cleared space or a vacant lot and put up little flags (if you haven’t got any desert space) and just weave your way in and out amongst these flags doing this: you predict where you’re going to put the car before you even start to turn it in that direction. And you keep predicting you’re going to put it there and then put it someplace else and then put it someplace else and put it someplace else and then you’re going to put it someplace else and then you’re going to change your mind and put it yet another place.

It’s set up on the basis, when the fellow was cocky and feeling brassy and he set it up, “It’ll remind me of everything I think of and of what happened in the past so I will know about it in the future.”

You have a tremendous competence. It’s great, it’s not slight.

So an auditor can become an automatic memory machine. I see at this moment that a lot of auditors immediately have assigned this and diagnosed themselves as having lost their own identity and have become these automatic memory machines. Well, you’re also the automatic memory machine. That doesn’t mean you’ve lost your own identity.

When you have employed your competence in the past to injure your fellow man or to injure animals, you have regretted your competence. And there is where your competence went. With great competence you took this bone knife and slit somebody’s throat, very expertly placed the knife blade exactly where it was supposed to go and slurrpp! Gone. And then you regretted your competence.

When an individual skids down the track, he obliterates his old identities because he believes that they were not dangerous to the environment and he assumes new identities which he believes are more dangerous to the environment. The odd part of it is that no identity was ever dangerous to the environment. The only thing that is really dangerous to the environment is “nothing.” You take a “nothingness” that can put out energy beams, that’s about the most dangerous thing you could run into in the environment, as far as that’s concerned.

Actually, you saw the fellow sink before you and you had to duplicate sinkingness. And so you didn’t duplicate the sinkingness and you’ve never duplicated it since, accurately and adequately, and so you still regret that tremendous competence. You aren’t actually regretting competence at all, you see, it’s just the fact that you didn’t duplicate it. And in such a wise, we get this prediction of particles.

So he is perfectly willing to assume-if you process him for a while and get over the ideas of how horrible it is to be nothing-he’ll all of a sudden realize that being nothing isn’t so bad at all, because it’s quite dangerous to the environment.

You can do this exercise, I said, by the way, you can do it with a horse, do it with a motorcycle. Again, you just make the postulate you're going to put the animal or the vehicle someplace and then put it there and then make up your mind you’re going to put it in such and such a place and then change your mind and put it in another place. And after a while, the vehicle will start to do things vehicles aren’t supposed to do. Your competence can just go up that high.

All right. What’s the goal in auditing any automatic machinery? Well, it’s to rehabilitate the fullest possible individuality and beingness to the preclear-his own. Where you got to go for it? It’s liable to be geographically placed. He lost his identity in 1832 in Hoboken. He just wasn’t proud anymore and then he became a doctor.

That would be the essence, by the way, of making a terrific jet pilot. You’d be surprised how much feeling there is in any individual that the vehicle or anything is itself acting. And an individual is as incompetent as he believes these particles are themselves self-determined.

Well, why did he get unproud? Well, some doctor fixed him up, really fixed him up. He was having an affair with the doctor’s wife and the doctor operated on him or something-something weird like this will happen. Well after that he became a doctor. Winning valence.

Knowingness and competence. Of course, knowingness, that’s sort of knowing where it is going to go and so we’re into flows and energies and so forth. But this is the universe we live in. It is composed of flows and energies, so we certainly better have competence regarding them. If we’re going to deal continually with particles, then let’s be able to handle particles-not “let’s just shun particles.” All right?

But the guy could become a doctor, really, only if he had an automatic machine which would lay in the basic foundations of being a doctor. Then having been a doctor, he finds out that he hates doctors, so he doesn’t like himself. So he looks around for something else to lick him so he can be it. You might say it’s a perpetual search to be beaten, on some low-toned cases, as they drift along.

I’m giving that a wider coverage this morning because, actually, we don’t have too much summary on knowingness-not as much as we have some of the other material which stems from it.

Well, when they start getting very thoroughly below 3.0, thoroughly below it, why, they go around looking for things to beat them up. They start to lose. Why do they want to lose? So they can win, of course.

Very rapidly, the elements which are most important at this time, just as a quick summary (I might have left one out here, but probably not), as a quick summary, the other elements that we have been studying are knowingness and then we have duplication. And “duplicate or not to duplicate, that is the question.” And that’s the only question there is, in terms of form. See, the second we put knowingness down into terms of form, in terms of flows, we first get into competence and then we get into duplication. We also with competence, by the way, get into convincingness and proof and other aspects of knowingness itself. But when we get down to just plain modus operandi-I mean, just bric-a-brac and mechanics and that sort of thing-we’re immediately into duplication.

Method of survival. That’s another method of survival: being something which has a survival potential. If something wins, it of course survives better. So we got the contest with the environment. Then we get the break point of the preclear at 2.0 where the environment becomes rather thoroughly dangerous to him and he is no longer dangerous to the environment. And above that, why, he’s a little bit dangerous to the environment, the environment is pretty dangerous to him. And you go on up to a point of where the environment isn’t even vaguely dangerous to him, he’s only dangerous to it. And then we get up into reasonable levels where we find the preclear not being interested in whether the environment is dangerous or not, it’s merely amusing.

Exact communication is one which is exactly duplicated. A communication is as good as it is exactly duplicated.

And the environment is as dangerous as there is low tone in it, to which a person could get into the winning valence of.

So communication is a specialized thing which uses space and uses duplication. It is a certain way of making a cause become an effect. You see, it’s a very certain, specialized way of making a Cause become an effect. In just plain knowingness there are other ways of making causes become effects. So, then we have beingness which is space and we have doingness which is energy and we have havingness which is time. And then we have everything we know about beingness, of course, just as such, and doingness just as such, and havingness just as such, and space just as such, and energy just as such and time just as such.

An individual who is in a shaky frame of mind about his own winningness will only then find danger in the hate, the fear, the mass hysterias of his environment with people. Because the truth of the matter is, is people below 2.0 communicate so badly-so badly, that a person has to go out of his way to get a communication to and from them and actually has to them to communicate with them to some degree. You see that?

But we have that coordination of these six elements. And that coordination is quite important because you can translate, id terms of experience, some of these things. And many a time you’ll be looking blankly at a preclear, wondering what the devil he’s doing, when it will suddenly occur to you that this individual’s laziness has something to do with energy and you will begin to probe jus't a little bit on the subject and you will find that the individual, early in life, perhaps, was a lineman for an electric company. Oh-oh. And now he’s lazy. Why, that’s peculiar. And these two data are immediately and intimately related. And there is where the case crosses and there is where his cross-up is. He’s worried mainly, and so are you, about his laziness. He can’t work, he says and so on. And we find these two coordinated data and we clear it up and he starts working like a steam engine-he’s just going in all directions. You just merely cleared up the fear of electricity across a line.

And an individual will get along as badly with them as he has to fight them. You know, resist. And in he goes, bang. Favorite trick of the universe. But this only occurs in the lower-tone bands.

It is, of course, quite dangerous for society where everybody is walking around trying to find a “winning-er” environment and trying to find a “winning-er” valence to be into and therefore trying to get beaten by it. It’s quite dangerous for very low-toned people to be loose. But who is it dangerous to? It’s dangerous to low-toned people. That’s who it’s dangerous to.

Now, we have this individual who hasn’t got enough time to assimilate data. And we immediately discover that this is a symptom of havingness. So there must be something wrong or aberrated, in some way or other, about some havingness or other about this individual. See, we could just process endlessly, in the terms of clocks, in the terms of study, in terms of examination. And we could just go on and plow, plow, plow, plow, plow and we wouldn’t get very far in the case unless we realize this person is having trouble with time. All right, if he’s having trouble with time-having trouble with havingness. Well, let’s translate it immediately into havingness and do some Remedy of Havingness. Soon as we start remedying havingness, the person has enough time. See, it’s so very simple. So, we’ve got that as the experience which is comparable to the MEST universe.

Now, it isn’t true that a thetan just automatically will snap inside of any body that he swats. You had a good time swatting bodies for a long time before you got to enough overt acts, enough overt-motivator sequences, enough collapsed terminals, to where you slid into one. And you probably had already forgotten that you’d ever had anything to do with bodies when one day you slapped one and in you went. So it appeared very mysterious to you. You never considered it important before and then you couldn’t get out of one.

So we’ve got the parts of the MEST universe, of space, energy and time. And those are the component parts of the MEST universe. And those component parts in human experience translate over to beingness, doingness and havingness and as long as we remember this and use it, why, you’re going to get a tremendous lineup.

The body being something and being very convincing-it’s convincing, not true-a body. A big difference, you know, between proof convincing and truth. Convincingness will make anything true. Proof will make anything true. There’s no more dangerous maniac than a scientist with a test tube. That bird can prove anything is true and down through the ages past, they have repeatedly.

The fellow says, "Well, you know, I...” his name, by the way, is Custard, and he’s very pasty. Man’s having trouble with beingness. Why? He’s trying to be his name. Immediate adjudication: he’s trying to be his name. And this name is not a very desirable name and so help me, this fellow’s not going to be able to be his name after all, unless he gets eaten. And this is idiotic, so the man must be having trouble with beingness, so he’s having trouble with space.

But the earliest crews that were proving something true to somebody else, of course, were just thetans. They were doing such things as playing a game. “Now, go into that hole there and find something. There’s a something in the hole.” (Of course, there’s nothing in the hole.) But, “Go into that hole and find something there.”

So, all right. "Well, be the space back of your body.” "Be the space of your body.” "Be the space of the room.” "Be the space back of your body.” "Be the space of your body.” "Let’s find two spaces you don’t object to having together.” So we’ve got space and time locking together. All kinds of material immediately shows up. "Let’s hold the two back anchor points of the room.” Yeah, that’s it, that one we could slug into with this fellow and chew, chew, chew, chew, chew, right along the line on that and we would get a remedy of his trying to be custard.

“All right, I will.”

And we never touched his name. We didn’t have to be specific at all. Now, you see, you can get very clever knowing this, as long as you remember the theory and the rules back of the game, to that degree.

So they go into the hole and the fellow says-he mocks-up a clock or something and he throws that out and he says, “Well, was this it?”

Now, part of the rules simply say, “All right, your beingness is as big as you can occupy space,” it says-it sort of says here on the MEST universe.

And they say, “No, that wasn’t it.” And so on and so on and so on.

This isn’t necessarily true in every universe, you see? But it’s sure true in this universe. Your beingness is as great as you can occupy space. In other words, you can be as much space as you can occupy and that’s all and that applies to the universe. And you can do as much as you have energy. That’s a lie, by the way. You don’t do because уou have energy, but this universe says, “You can do if you have energy.”

Of course, the fact of the matter was, the hole is empty. But it’s just one of these little mild games. Well, a fellow could get sold on the game and if he got himself into a situation where he was trying to protect something he was trying to prove . . . You have to see how locked up this has to get to get loused up. He has to protect something he’s trying to prove and then he gets very convincing about it, he’ll skid. And that’s the only way he’ll really skid.

You see that again. It doesn’t apply to every universe, but it sure applies to this one. I say it doesn’t necessarily apply to every universe. You can Sit back and think how it might apply to another universe and you’d probably come up with the same answer, but there might be some variations on it, but we’d certainly know that here that energy ... so on. “Wheaties, the Breakfast of Champions”-this is how-so on. “You can do if you have energy.” I mean, they dramatize it all over the place. This is balderdash. “You can do as much as you can create” would come closer to the truth, but the trouble with your preclear’s doingness is energy. If he’s afraid of energy: “Now, give me three energies which you are not.”

Because below 2.0, people aren’t dangerous. The people who get furiously angry at no provocation are not dangerous to a thetan. They can be dangerous to a body, because they’re liable to start shooting or something. But they’re not dangerous to a thetan.

This fellow won’t go out of the house. We say, well, he’s having space trouble. Well, he can’t touch space. Well, he isn’t doing anything. He’s staying in one place. He isn’t doing. He isn’t moving around. Well, this requires energy and you’ll run into this problem very often. If you didn’t know this, you’d find this a very confounding problem-has to do with the walls being too thick or something of the sort. No, it just has to do with this: “Give me three energies which you are not, which you don’t have to be afraid of at the moment. Three energies which aren’t touching you at the moment”-almost any kind of a process-Straightwire or any other kind of a process which would get him into handling energy again and get him familiar with energy and get him over being afraid of it.

They’re not even dangerous to a thetan in a body, beyond giving him some losingness. Now, they can storm and rant all they please, but the truth of the matter is there’s darn little emanation. That’s a ridge talking. And if it talks long enough, it’ll go into Fear.

Now, we take this-I just gave you an example-havingness.

Now, the emanation, the words-MEST words-flying around are about the only counter-emotion there is in the low tones. A person has to approximate Fear in order to feel Fear.

This individual has to have, has to have, has to have and he doesn’t like anything he has. Well, you remember in the Doctorate tapes: anything you get in this universe you don’t want, anything you don’t want you get, anything that you agree with will disagree with you and anything... It’s a rather sad picture, but that’s when you get into flows. Well, you know that’s the case, so that the fellow is getting into havingness, he’s going to have a rough time of it. Then, must be something wrong with his havingness, so you remedy it. You can sometimes hit a specific example with Creative Processing, which immediately snaps him out of it.

Only the higher parts of the band emanate easily. They’re the only ones that have any power because they’re the only ones where the individual can flow or not flow, as the case may be. Well, those things which are stimulus-response mechanisms, which flow and don’t flow, are, of course, not even vaguely dangerous.

For instance, havingness. I found that an individual one time couldn’t have a school. He was very stupid, he thought. He couldn’t have a school. Why couldn’t he have a school? And we traced it back to his being expelled-you can laugh if you please, but he was six years old and he was expelled.

All right. Let’s take somebody-let’s take one of you. You set up a Clinic and you’ve been treating a bunch of school kids or something of the sort and you’ve been running a group. Now, all of a sudden, somebody comes in with “Hectoronomy” or something and they move in across the street. Well now, you could conceive there was vast danger in this-people across the street-because the first thing they do is demonstrate how much they hate you. They’re using, or trying to use, materials which you yourself are using. And they’re calling it something else and they’re fouling people up and they’re saying how you don’t know your business and how you just ruin everybody.

Well, he was expelled under terrific duress and they made a great deal of it and it meant as much to that six-year-old as it would mean to an admiral to be court-martialed. And he had just covered up the incident and buried it up and hidden it carefully and it was sitting there as an automatic machine that told him he couldn’t have schools. And it also told him he didn’t dare fight anybody, because that’s why he was expelled. And he was in fear thereafter.

And they go on and they’re doing, according to what you hear, an awful lot of talking. Talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, yap, yap, yap, yap, yap. Unfortunately for them, your business will decline and your traffic and your Clinic will decline only to the ratio that you conceive their existence to be dangerous and permit them to communicate. Because they can only use your comm line-they haven’t got one. They’re not dangerous. You can err only to the degree of permitting them to communicate. I speak from experience on that. The only way you permit them to communicate or stop their communication, one way or the other, is simply-you’ve got to hang up a communication line for them to communicate on.

You, of course, are on shaky ground when you try to solve a case with one little button or something of the sort. But here we found the main trouble with this individual was havingness, because his time was all out. He couldn’t start anything, that was the main trouble with him and so there he was. And the solution of that havingness materially advanced his case. All right.

You don’t even hang up the subject or the symbol or anything like that. That isn’t even good enough. You actually have to get in there and practically mail their letters for them.

Then we’ve got communication, which is the A-В line, and something that starts through space is В duplicating A or not duplicating A. And one end of it, the A or source end, we call Gause and the other end we call Effect. And we have a Cause-Effect graph and that is Cause-Effect.

Now, they will set up shop and fail. They will. There is no doubt about it. Might take them a long time to fail.

Now, we turn that same graph backwards when we get a tzwversation and you’ll find all sorts of peculiar manifestations occurring on this communication line. We find the individual who can’t have space has A and В or C and E (A and B, just the nominative letters, they’re actually Cause and Effect), we get C and E immediately together. Well, what’s this tell you? This tells you if he has C and E together that everything he causes he’ll be the effect of.

Preclear or two of yours who are pretty low-toned might fall into the rattrap and that might swamp them one way or the other. And, of course, if you get mad enough about it and tell enough other preclears about it and make communication for this outfit, why, it can hurt you.

Holy cats. There’s your overt act-motivator sequence, which has been so puzzling for so long. Individual cannot act because of the consequences. Well, what’s this all about? Well, it goes back to a problem of beingness, then, simply must be a problem of beingness, because he doesn’t have space. If he doesn’t have space, he can’t have any space between C and E and that’s a necessary condition to communication. So we get overt act-motivator sequence, we get motivator hunger, we get all sorts of weird things. This fellow, for instance, every time he puts out a mock-up, it hits him in the face. Well, he can’t put any space between two terminals, that’s all, he can’t put any space between C and E. He’s cause, but he puts something out there and he becomes the effect of anything he tries to put out there. So he is the effect of anything he tries to cause, so he won’t act anymore. And that’s immediate result of just looking at that communication graph.

But if you’ve set yourself up to protect every single person in the entire community, you have set yourself up to change the life of every person in that community. Therefore, you have set yourself up to control every person in the community and monitor his actions and therefore you’ve set yourself up to protect each individual person in the community.

Now, we go into this whole band which goes down from Knowingness, Beingness, Perceivingness, Emotingness, Effortingness, Thinkingness, Symbolizingness, Eatingness and Sexingness. And we look at that whole band and we find out that there’s more darn processes on that band and the funny part of it is, is we process somebody, he’ll run through these condensations. And there’s a funny way of checking a case that will interest you. There’s an odd way of checking a case: Is he moving up the band otdown the band as you process him? Is he becoming more interested in, or is he getting more pictures of, the upper or the lower manifestation on that band?

Boy, that’s a real hard job.

In other words, as we process his thinkingness for quite a while and all of a sudden he gets very interested in symbols. Oh, no. No, no. We’re processing him south. We don’t want to process him south. We’d better start processing him north. We’ve probably given him too much somethingness processes. We haven’t given him enough nothingness to process. We’ve been validating symbols just by talking to him and analyzing words and so forth and we’ve driven him south. Well, he’s getting further and further from effort. We want to get him up through effort and force, objects, way up the line up there.

You know, you could own a whole community without protecting a single part of it. But that’s a different level of ownership than most people can understand.

Well, let’s take the emotional band. I’m going to give you an example in a little while on some processing on the emotional band which is very interesting.

For instance, talked to a couple of officers on a bridge one day about the Pribilofs (we were cruising in along the Pribilofs) and I said, “Well, I got some islands over that way, over there.”

The straightwire-type process that you find in 8-C, negative orientation-type processing, is applicable to this whole band. “Give me three efforts which you don’t have to make right now, just take one at random.” “Give us three sexual manifestations you don’t object to.” The next half-hour will be spent with a preclear’s having a hard time-but the next half-hour will be spent waiting for that preclear to come up with the answer or trying to assist him in coming up with an answer somehow or another.

And they said, “You’ve got some islands over that way?”

Every once in a while you’ll really put both feet in it. You’ll wish, “For God’s sakes, why did I ever ask that question?” Because you didn’t estimate the person’s position on the tone band, you gave him something which was too tough.

And I said, “Sure.”

This preclear should have had Opening Procedure a lot more minutes, or tens of minutes, than you gave it to him. You said, well, you felt good that morning-the preclear didn’t, but jazz felt good that morning. And you said, “Give me three kinds of sex that you don’t object to.”

Communication by Emotion: Flows, Ridges mThey said, “ Why, gee whiz, nobody owns them.”

“Three kinds? Let’s see, one-no-no ...” You’re in for a picnic. You’ll just have to work with him then. You’ve asked him the question. Well, by golly, if you’ve asked him the question, get an answer. All right.

And I said, “Oh, you’re wrong. I do.” And we were talking this way and that about V the Pribilofs and they became more and more and more upset. This was not occasion for a joke. You see, this started out as a joke and they became more and more upset. Well, their level of ownership was so tenuous that they secretly owned the Pribilofs. And I overtly owned them. And they, of course, became very concerned-it was not a joke, фYou start to talk much about the ownership of things and stuff around in the community and so forth and you’ll find people-they don’t like you to talk that way. Because, they " couldn’t own it themselves, but by you overtly owning it, you disenfranchise their covertion. Well, similarly, if you start talking about owning the whole community, why, people get upset with you. Or if you own a monopoly on anything or say you do, people get very upset with you. But the people who get upset with you are the people who are having trouble with ownership, who are the people who will fail. And the reason they will fail is because they don’t communicate well, because they’re usually ridges or low dispersals.

You can take that whole band, then, and apply this type of Straightwire, you apply it in brackets and so on. But remember, as you’re applying that type of Straightwire that it can get off into a subjective process. It gets off into a subjective process the moment that you start getting the rest of the bracket. See that? The rest of the bracket and here we go, it’s into a subjective process.

A dispersal doesn’t communicate-it’s something communicating for the individual. A Fear dispersal, for instance, communicates automatically, Fear.

So, every time you’ve run a subjective process for a while, let’s run some nothingness.

Well, all right. Let’s move over into something a little more practical and we find out, however, that an individual can be suppressed into being one of his own automaticities.

All right. Now, let’s look at the cycle-of-action of the MEST universe as one of the factors which we’re dealing with and we find that it is Create-Survive-Destroy, which is in the Vedic-it was stated: birth so, so-and-so. Actually that cycle goes Nothingness-Create-Survive-Destroy-Nothingness. Nothingness is on both ends of the band, it’s just understood to be. You see, it starts here at create and goes over to destroy through persist or survive. And you have understood at that moment, without stating it, that a nothingness was ahead of the creation and nothingness was behind it, but we’ve just always omitted to state that supposition.

And this is the more peculiar case. Here is the case with five personalities. You can locate geographically where the individual is located, by the way, in relationship to his body, You needn’t be too concerned about this. This isn’t important material I’m giving you, it’s just bric-a-brac. But don't get puzzled over it. If I had never mentioned this, why, you might run into it and say, “My God, my God, what has happened here? This fellow is obsessed by a lot of demons. Yeah, he’s got at least seven, eight, nine, ten demons that — we can count” and so forth.

Actually, the nothingness before and the nothingness afterwards are more important to you as an auditor than the Create-Survive-Destroy in the middle of the cycle.

There was another fellow back on the time track who was fooled by this manifestation. We won’t mention any names, we don’t want to be sacrilegious. But the demons which are attacking the individual are almost uniformly his own automaticities.

Well, out of that we get cycles-of-action. We find this individual can’t create anything. Well, if he can’t create anything, it’s probably because he can’t destroy anything and he’s probably bent upon surviving. We can run end of cycle on all sorts of things or run beginning of cycle to back his track up. And that’s a cute little trick-you run beginning of cycle: “Now get something which you haven’t created yet. Now get something else out there in a mock-up form which you haven’t created yet.”

Because if he only knew it or would admit it, he has enough beef (strength, power) that he’s practically puncture-proof. A body is quite explosive. The chances of this individual having his body taken away from him-quite slight. A body which is very low-toned could be monitored very, very easily by a Theta Clear. And it could be monitored with great ease by an Operating Thetan. But boy, that body would have to be in lousy shape; otherwise there’s going to be electrical circuits and so forth that’ll short.

The guy will wake up to the fact that he has to put nothing there, he has to start with a nothingness. Well, in the whole business of existence, you’re always trying to start with a nothingness and are being confounded by the fact that there’s so many somethingnesses around.

It’s a very hard thing for an individual who’s pretty well up the line to manage a body in the first place without blowing up pieces of it. Because he’ll overreach himself all the time. He gets tired of being so careful and he’s liable to blow ridges on it. You’ll very often find a preclear’s-blow a whole series of ridges in his head and just give him a terrible flock of pains that go shooting through the head. He blows up a whole lot of little tiny control ridges, one way or the other. Oh, it’s very upsetting.

You’re going to build this housing project and you’ve got it all drawn down on paper and you’re just going to have a wonderful time building this housing project and, oh man, it’s just tremendous there. You’ve just got all this nothingness and you’re just filling it in, in all places, you see. And you’re going out there and you’re going to assemble new lumber and “Oh boy, this is going to be a beautiful housing project.” And then you drive out to the place and find there’s a tenement sitting on the ground you’re going to use. “Well, that’s all right, but you can tear all it down,” you say, “and we still can start with a nothingness, you see?”

Well, a strange thetan coming around and trying to interiorize, as such, in a body which you already have energized, just doesn’t have much chance of doing so. You’ll run into this as you work along. You’ll see more people get electronically jolted out of some body. You tell a preclear to move in and he moves in very smoothly and he can control this particular body. And then the next time we turn around, why, we get this kind of a manifestation, entirely different manifestation. He starts in and he comes out faster than he moves in, mostly because he himself is a certain mass. He has to use some energy in order to control a body. He has to go on the wavelength of the body. There’s already some energy in the body because there’s already somebody in the body.

And they say, “Well, you can tear it all down but those two buildings over there and they’re on a ninety-nine year lease.”

You’ll find preclears all the time worried about getting their body stolen. They aren’t going to get their body stolen. They could even be miles and miles away from it, without it being stolen and animated by anybody else, simply because they have tremendous control lines on it and tremendous energy deposits in it and around it. See that? It’s not very important, but yet, they worry about it.

You say, “How do we integrate those into our housing project?”

Now, you might not quite see how this is and so forth. How you need to record on it is that there’s not much danger in this particular line. There’s not anywhere near as much danger in it as there would be in the preclear shifting around and hitting one of his own automaticities or attacking one of his own automaticities.

“Well, I don’t know, you’ll just have to.”

Now, these automatic machines have beingness in them. That’s the only way they can operate. They have to have a beingness in them or they can’t operate at all. To that degree, they’re alive. To that degree, they’re you. Because they are you, because you made them.

Oh. You’re already starting with a somethingness, so we can’t run a clean cycle.

We don’t have any problem here. I mean, this-you could say, you could see it on a MEST level: an E-Meter builds a small E-Meter. Well, it has to put into the small E-Meter at least something of itself. You see that?

A clean cycle is always run from a nothingness through to a nothingness. The preclear’s difficulty is that he can’t run a clean cycle. Death is not a clean cycle. His tremendous effort to have death remain death is simply this effort to start with nothing so that he can create something cleanly, out of whole cloth, which will not be influenced by earlier structures.

All right. Our problem of strange and peculiar manifestations really narrows down, in terms of ghosts, spirits, haunts and that sort of thing, into a person’s being slugged by his own automaticities. And the strange problems of valence that we run into is generally a person shifting around from one automatic machine to the other automatic machine, having deserted the central command post which is the position he should be in.

The painter starts in with a piece of clean canvas and he’s going to paint something. And he says, “You know, I’m going to start in with a complete nothingness-look at this beautiful piece of white canvas.” And there’s a letter there saying, “Dear Mr. Petty, This time we want a girl with slightly longer legs.” See, he can’t create it. That’s the somethingness. The somethingness is the order. And no telling what he would do if he could start with a clean canvas, but he never does.

But if he’s in one of these automatic machines, he puts an awful lot of beingness in the machine. There isn’t such a thing as his ceasing to be and then becoming the machine. There’s such a thing as his being able to pretend utterly that he’s the machine and being able to pretend that he isn’t.

But once in a blue moon you’ll go into a painter’s place and you’ll look around and you will find some particularly magnificent startling piece of stuff, you see? Oh, it’s got verve and everything. Oh, it’s just tremendous.

You can look around-go have him look around and you can find the geographical location he ought to be in. That area is not alive-hot until he goes into it. But a lot of control lines and things like that go out from that area, which he’d be very pleased to have.

And you’ll say, “What’s that?”

Now, once in a while, you get this weird manifestation of a preclear: he runs something and all of a sudden the preclear feels terrific and stays that way for about two or three days and then feels awful. What we know as a manic.

“Well, I don’t know, one day I just knocked it off, not for any reason or anything of the sort and never put it up for exhibition or anything, it’s just there.”

Well, manics are not very important, but he could hit a high-charged machine and exhaust a lot of residual lines and so forth to the machine and be in a high state of motion or he could simply have begun to occupy, once more, his own control center as a thetan. You know, he’s just in the place he ought to be in as a thetan and so it makes him feel terrific. Only he can’t stay there, because it’s too difficult to stay there, because it’s too dangerous to stay there and so on. You just keep up with your common ordinary drills and you’ll get him out of this.

And you say, “That’s terrific. That’s got a lot of... ”

But how do you work an automaticity? You have the person be the machine and be himself and be the machine and be himself. What happens? How do you work a preclear who is being his own automaticity? Have him be a man being worked by himself and then have him be himself working himself and back and forth, back and forth. Get some beingness and some doingness mixed up in it and shift it back and forth and all of a sudden the automaticity breaks down.

“Well, I don’t know, maybe they like it and maybe they don’t.”

If you were to break down all of a preclear’s automaticities, you’d probably break a body completely to pieces. We had one case of a fellow who had automatic machinery taken away from him for about two solid hours-and he was doing it rather well-and so his auditor just sat there and took this machinery away from him for a couple of hours. And all of a sudden, at the end of the time, he collapsed. Suddenly, the body collapsed, began to pant, was in a dreadful state of commotion and he’d dropped straight into some space opera. And he had just that moment been shot. And if there was any carefully compartmented engram of anything, it was the engram of his having been shot that time, mostly because there was so much energy in it. I suppose he was keeping it around to make a new machine out of it someday. But he dropped square into it and he panted and so on.

He isn’t anxious to sell that thing. That’s the only one he ever started with a nothingness. He had no reason, no purpose to paint it, no significance about it. He just up and painted something. And that’s very valuable to him.

All the auditor did was restore some of his havingness, give him back a few automaticities, square him around and let him catch his breath and he was in beautiful condition. So you see, there’s not much liability to it.

Many a young writer is much better off than many an old dog who is a terrific craftsman, because the old dog is always starting with a somethingness and the young writer is terribly impressed with the fact of his own nothingness. So we get the elan and the dash and verve of a new writer’s material and the tremendous perfection and rhythm of an old writer’s material. It’s tremendously perfect, there are no errors in it-there’s no spark, either.

All right. As we go over this picture of the preclear, we find he is as complex as he cares to be. But he is complex upon these centralized points, as we go down the line of Knowingness, Duplication, Control, Beingness, Doingness, Havingness, Space, Energy, Time, Communication, Cause, Effect. The scale from Know down to Sex; the curve of nothing, Create-Survive-Destroy, nothing. The dichotomy of Nothing-Something; the eight dynamics; ARC; the Tone Scale-including, of course, Ownership, Protection, Hiding.

Then we have just plain nothing-something, as a basic. These are all just basics I’m giving you, just basics. There’s something and nothing: betwixt the two they make a “maybe.” And almost any something that you see was, theoretically, according to the Theta-MEST Theory, the halfway line between an absolute something and an absolute nothing. That was the Theta-MEST Theory: absolute something to absolute nothing. And you’re hanging up somewhere between. You see, that wall over there really isn’t a something and it really isn’t a nothing. It’s at least an idea and it’s got space in it and you might not be able to find the electrons, but the space is there. And there’s a lot of questions come up about it. Well, the reason the questions come up about it is because it isn’t an absolute something.

He’s mixed up-he’s a different kind of cake. He’s always a different kind of cake, but he’s always baked with the same ingredients-or half-baked.

Well, we falter by the wayside when we try to find this absolute something. It is not obtainable, not according to my experience. There is no matter which yet does not contain some space. I know of no matter which does not yet contain some space. I know of no real particle of energy-nothing that actually exists-I know of impulses, but I don’t know of any particles.

Now, recognizing the anatomy of the beast, it’s very easy to take the beast apart. But don’t be surprised to find some of these beasts suddenly becoming washbasins.

Now, we’re talking nuclear physicswise. And that’s been awfully thoroughly investigated recently and, although the boys are pretty well off the track on a lot of things, that one hasn’t seen any reason to vary. It just keeps getting proven more and more and more so.

Momentarily, the fellow says, “I have a funny feeling around my collar and ...” “What is that?”

But theoretically, according to the Theta-MEST Theory, there is somewhere an absolute somethingness. And it would be halfway between this nothingness and this somethingness that you get this kind of a MEST universe “maybe.” And the reason why the MEST universe remains a maybe is because it is a maybe. You can’t know the MEST universe utterly and absolutely with great certainty because it is a maybe.

“I don’t know,” he says. “I... I don’t know what it is. It’s a funny feeling, though.” Well, you don’t even have to pay too much attention to it. Have him look through it and it will generally go away. But you’ve hit a time when a washbasin won. That’s all. It’s no more inexplicable than that. A washbasin won.

And that’s the Theta-MEST Theory. That isn’t necessarily true or false, that is the theory on which we were proceeding a couple of years ago which brought up a lot of other stuff here. Still has validity, though, and it hasn’t been supplanted. Still predicting data and when looked for, the data is found.

Now, do you know that you will run into preclears who quite uniformly shift in and out of the human body line? So don’t be upset about that, either. You see that?

Absolute somethingness. What would that be? It would be something which actually had mass and didn’t have any space between its mass, which actually did have particles. And boy, that would really be something, wouldn’t it?

I mean, the guy runs a horse this life. He decides he’ll be a horse. He’s a perfectly good horse and then he decides he’ll be a human being.

A pinhead of it here on Earth, theoretically, would weigh enough so that if it were dropped, it would pass straight through Earth. It wouldn’t stop on the surface, it would wind up at the core. The gravitic action of that pinhead would probably be greater than the total gravitic action of Earth and yet, theoretically, it exists. All right.

The Egyptians used to talk about transmigration of the soul as though this is something that happened and it migrated with immigration papers or something. But a fellow who has been very mean to horses is liable to make it up by being a horse. He can be a very savvy horse.

Something and nothing. Always-you can always make a process out of something and nothing and certainty. I don’t care what kind of a process it is, it’ll have workability. Just like you can always make a process out of something about time. And that’s the next one: time.

Well, every once in a while, you run into a real wise horse, real smart horse. You can’t get him to do anything-work his way out of anything. Well, that’s some thetan running “the glorious irresponsibility of being a horse.”

You can directly process time in terms of particles and spaces. The individual is objecting to time and all you’re interested in is what he’s resisting about time, not his theory of time. He’s either in apathy about having rejected some time or in fear of some time being rejected or just objecting to time in general. And that’s always because something has occurred to him in terms of havingness which he doesn’t like.

Once in a while, you’ll run into a dog-I ran into one yesterday, tipped my hat and said, “Hello.” He was a real smart, wise old dog. He was a very fine dog. He was a crossbreed of this and that and he was real tough and he was with a couple of young boys that he looked after. You could look in his eyes and see that there was more there than a dog-very, very easy. So I said, “Hello” to him and asked him if he was having a good time and he barked once, [laughter]

And so there’s particles which are apart that he ought to have together and particles which are together that he ought to have apart back in 1066 and he’s still trying to prevent the Norman charge or something at the Battle of Hastings. And here are all these particles starting to come up the hill and he’s trying to get these arrows to go down the hill and it hasn’t taken place yet, because he got killed at that moment. And you’ll find him stuck right there. But do you have to look for that incident, really, or process it? No, you just get particles that he has to have apart and particles that he has to have together and particles he doesn’t object to being apart and... “Now get two particles you wouldn’t want together” is another variation of this.

Now, a thetan can play the game of “let’s pretend” to such a tremendous degree that he can convince himself utterly. Now, that is one of the weirdest talents he has. To be able to play the game of “let’s pretend” so thoroughly that he won’t have any memory beyond a certain point, that he won’t remember certain things, that he won’t recall his own anatomy or know how he got there or know where he’s going or anything else. He’s playing the game of “let’s pretend.” So he can “let’s pretend” I’m a washbasin or “let’s pretend” I’m a lion. One day at one of the old Foundations, we ran a preclear through the lifetime of a lion who had bitten her keeper. You remember that one? And she recovered from her psychosis. That was all that was done to her. We just ran out the overt act of biting the keeper.

A nuclear physicist always comes up with the answer very surprisingly and very pleased all of a sudden, "Two plutonium particles-don’t want those together, they can stay apart just as far as they want.” All right.

Everybody says, “My God, what will these preclears think of next?” You know, and they were all upset about this. She’d been a lion, there’s no doubt about that.

And from there we go on into the eight dynamics, which is just compartmentation of what we’re trying to create, make persist and destroy and then we get into ARC and the Tone Scale. And they have not departed, ARC and the Tone Scale, just because we don’t pay much attention to them.

Well, “Be surprised at nothing” is a tremendously good motto. And even though there are many beautiful surprises (it’d be a dull universe if there weren’t), don’t, just because you run into surprises, start taking your fingers off these very specific essentials such as knowingness, control, duplication, beingness, doingness, havingness, space, energy, time, communication, cause and effect, the scale from Know down to Sex, the Nothingness-Create-Survive-Destroy-Nothingness cycle-of-action, the Nothingness-Something dichotomy, the eight dynamics, ARC, the Tone Scale, clear on down through Ownership and Hiding,

As an example of that in the last lecture, “Give me three things you wouldn’t object О to communicating with,” would be the proper way to get it. “Three things you wouldn’t g» object to communicating with.” “Three things that aren’t trying to communicate with you.” “Three things you’re not trying to communicate with.” “Three things you don’t have to have any affinity for.” “Three things that don’t have to have any affinity for you.” A Such variations as that will process the guy up the scale and will actually change his position on the meter.

The most common tone to cases that don’t exteriorize or work well is Fear. So you 27 start running “Give me three things you’re not afraid of,” with great certainty, he’s liable to wind up by getting three “nothingnesses of something” that he’s not afraid of. And of course, when you get nothingnesses being Wonderful, you’re running a case which is looking for relief not looking for release. Two different things.

Now, the Tone Scale itself, as you will find there on the back wall, that is the most complete available Tone Scale.

Of course, relief comes at the end of an operation or the end of ardure. You’re running a case who requires an enormous enforcement of present time to be in present time. You’re running a case which goes up to present time for emergency periods only, who is otherwise waiting for something to force him to present time before he’s in present time.

Now, you’re trying, essentially, to predict human beings.

You run cases of that character, these cases are normally-they’re not in Fear, they’re not at 1.0 on the Tone Scale, but the one band they can’t cross or fool around with very much is Fear. They can’t touch the wall: they get hold of the wall, they can’t let go of the wall, things like this. They are having trouble. They’re afraid of things and they’re doing an automatic let go. They expect you, by some necromancy, to make them let go of their own heads. They’re waiting for an effect, of course.

In order to live with human beings, you have to predict them or predict MEST objects or predict spirits or predict something. You want to know what they are going to do. That’s where people get hung up in this universe and the Tone Scale is a prediction of what people are going to do. It’s unfortunately quite, quite accurate.

Such a case is unmistakable, since it runs rather uniformly. Any case even vaguely resembling that-and almost any case that will not exteriorize, except the very, very low-toned ones where they’re in catatonic schizophrenia (you know, just blabb)-almost any case is doing this. They put out an idea to get a recoiled action against their own body. If you ask them to run a concept, they put out the concept so that they can get a somatic. That’s a common denominator of cases that don’t exteriorize well.

All right.

And the other common line that we’ve been working forward toward and up to here during these first couple of weeks, we’ve tried to go over theory and get you well grounded in that so that you’d understand some more of the exteriorization and its mechanics. The one band that they free on is Fear. And the Fear, of course, when freed, will leave the auditor with a certain amount of Hate to resolve. There is Hate kicking around here.

Oh, “Give me three things you don’t hate.” “Give me three things you’re not afraid of.” You get them with certainty and run a lot of that. And don’t forget, in all auditing-in all auditing, to have people put emotions into things and feel them back, thinkingness into things and feel them back, sensations into things and feel them back. That’s background music to auditing.

You’re probably not doing even vaguely, even vaguely enough of that. Put blackness on the outside of the wall. Something wrong with the case, have him put it on the outside of the wall and get it back. You’d be surprised at some of the effort on some of these cases. Every time the guy starts to think of something angry, he closes his eyes, he puts out a certain amount of energy and he’ll get the visio of the wall being knocked out. And as he lets it go, he’ll get a visio of the whole town being knocked flat. That’s how mad he is.

And so you start putting Anger into things and running the preclear, one way or the other, why, you can expect destruction and chaos to be envisioned by him in all directions. Of course, because it happens in mock-up-not actually-it only demonstrates this: this is what he’d like to do and can’t. So therefore, he can do it to a mock-up and say he’s doing it, but he won’t do it on the actuality, simply because he hasn’t got enough Fear.

You get an Operating Thetan up along the line, if he became too slighted by a town, I imagine he would knock it flat. That’s tough. But gee, you’d have to work to get him sore. You’d just have to work like mad. And it’d probably take an Operating Thetan to get him sore, get him real mad. It’d have to be some awful dirty trick. I can’t imagine, offhand, exactly how you would go about getting an Operating Thetan mad enough to flatten a town. I know, because a few times, puckishly, I have sat around and tried to persuade some of them to knock Moscow flat.

And though I considered this was very serious and this was something that should be done and so forth and-I’ve even gone to the point of getting one to volunteer to do it and go on his way. And then have him get interested in a peasant fishing in the river or something else.

A thetan, by the way, is tremendously non sequitur. This non sequiturness is a symptom of very high tone, it’s tremendous differentiation.

It’d be perfectly connected logic for him, for instance, to say, “This room-the library-doesn’t have any chrysanthemums.” And that would be even a little more logical than he would consider logical. As a person begins to differentiate, meanings become wider and wider apart and a consecutive flow of conversation then becomes wider and wider apart. Did you ever know anybody who double-talked with great ease? You know, he talks about the chrysanthemums in the beer and why the submarines and there were no spokes because of the air [laughter] and would go on a long monologic conversation on this subject. Well, don’t look at that person, look at the persons around listening to him.