Thank you.

How are you today?

Okay. Let's get down to business. Now, we've fooled around long enough, that's a fact.

Thank you.

I know you expected me to process you in this hour — I'm not going to. Your seminar leader's doing a very, very good job, and when you get along just a little bit further along the line with your seminar leaders — in pretty good shape — I'm going to run a process on you which erases the chair and the body and the room. (audience laughter)

Well, today being the second day of this congress, seems to me like we'd better get down to business and stop this fooling around, this talking about religion and junk and stuff, and getting down to — well, at least solid gold tacks.

So, in this particular congress, I sort of have to hold back on the processing. I have to hold back on it a little bit. But you'll get it.

Now, the essence of the situation is that a great many years ago, a caveman named Ugh decided he could do something for a caveman named Oogh. And at that time there were no laws preventing Ugh from doing anything to Oogh, and he fooled around and he said, "Be three feet back of your head." And after that the technology was lost and we've just rediscovered it.

Anyhow, the most significant developments in research in Scientology have to do, today, with exteriorization and the isolation of the three primary buttons of exteriorization. All right. All has to do with the Tone Scale.

No, all fooling aside, there is a great deal to be known about processing as it exists today, and a great deal of differentiation should be made by us who are doing processing to understand rather clearly that we are not trying to find something wrong with somebody so we can make it right.

There is, and has been in existence for a long time, a thing called the Tone Scale. Has to do with human tone or human emotion. The first rendition of it is found in Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health, and we have borrowed it from Dianetics. It's the first chart in Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health. So this thing really has precedence. I mean, it goes way back.

Do you know what would happen if you started to make something wrong — tried to find something wrong with somebody and then made it right? Well, I invite you to look over the axioms of life as contained in The Creation of Human Ability. That which you change persists. Now, let's look at that very clearly. That which you change persists. The only way you get a persistence, the only way you get time, is by changing MEST. By changing matter, energy and space, you get time. And if there's no change, there's no time, and it's as simple as that. So that if you try to change in any degree matter, energy, space and — you get time, you get persistence. What is time but persistence? So that which you change, if it be made of space or of energy or matter, will persist. You should see that very clearly.

Now, this chart was further developed in Science of Survival. And Science of Survival, a rather thick book, is devoted entirely to this chart and various levels on it. Now, actually, Science of Survival treats of what you would call "thetan plus body" — spirit plus body — and these two combined make a certain combination which is predictable. And Science of Survival is devoted to that.

We take a car and we move it around in space — and I call to your attention something that every motorist has noted and no motorist had quite understood: that when he failed to drive his car it went to pieces. Have you ever noticed that? You park it in the garage, that's that; the battery goes down, the tires go flat. Maybe it was up on blocks, maybe the battery was taken over to the service station and put on continuous charge and all of this was done. That's some small prevention of the situation. But then — then three months later you put the battery back in, you take it down off the blocks and you "rr-rr-rr-rr-rr-rr-rr-rr-rr-rr," "rr-rr-rr-rr-rr-rr-rr-rr-rr-rr-rr-rr," and oil smoke goes out the rear end, won't steer. That's an oddity. The only reason it stayed there at all is because Earth is going around and it was being changed in space, at least to some degree. If it were not being changed in space at all, it would not be there; it would cease to persist. Now this is a great oddity — a great oddity. I don't call upon your superstition in this regard, I merely call upon you to observe in its crude form something else.

All right. Now, the next development along this line — a similar chart — was the Chart of Attitudes. And another development along this line appeared in Scientology: 8-80, which is the subzero Tone Scale, which goes down to -8.0.

All right. Let's take a chronic somatic, what we know as a chronic somatic: a pain which persists. And we take this preclear with this nice pain and we say, "Move it to the right, move it to the left, move it up, move it down, move it to the right, move it to the left." Now if it weren't for the fact that life was present, that pain would go on to the end of time — if it weren't for the fact that life was present. Another factor alone occasionally lets you get away with it, and that is the factor of pan-determinism: You're exerting control over something, so you change your mind about its dangerousness. And although you might not feel the pain anymore, believe me, it still exists.

Now, here we have — here we have, today, a further development of this Tone Scale. Now, there are some little pads which are available to you here at this congress, which we've had made up, which are plotting pads. They plot the preclear on the Tone Scale. And we have gone out sideways and we've put the Know to Mystery Scale at right angles to the Tone Scale. And you will see that on these little plotted sheets, which you can get here. All right.

You could take a preclear who has had a chronic somatic treated as it is treated in the healing sciences, so-called — as this chronic somatic is treated in the healing sciences — and we know very well that little Roscoe had a bad set of tonsils. We know this. He had a very poor set of tonsils. And so they held him down, you know, kindly, and put the ether mask on his face kindly and when he tried to struggle, why, they kindly shoved his hrrm-rm-hrrm-rm-hm-rm, and they got some water and they scrubbed around like this, and worked him over this way and that, packed him off, changed his position after the operation while he was still asleep and put him in a hospital room right down the corridor. Well this, of course, cured the tonsils. See, he's cured of tonsils — that's a great certainty. Everybody would agree he no longer has tonsils, is this right?

These plotted sheets have to do with running cases. We're not interested right now in running cases. What we're interested in is the development of this scale.

Well then, how in the name of common sense can a Dianetic Auditor take this person back down the time track into the past and find tonsils and pain in an operation? How does this exist? How can this be? And yet it's done, and many, many of those present have done this. So we have this fellow going through life — (wheezing noises) he can't talk very well, you know, he has sore throats all the time, and we wonder what's wrong with him. What's wrong with him is his tonsils, but they're not there anymore! But that's what's wrong with him: the fact that his tonsils were changed. So the second we operated, we got ourselves a persistence of the condition.

First and foremost, we should see this scale as a gradient scale of survival — potentialities of survival. Naturally, when we say survival, we are talking — in an ultimate survival — about immortality. Now, please take a good look at that. You think we're way out of gear on religion or something of this sort — we've been talking about immortality here for years. Now, the immortality would be at the — way up top. It would be a person surviving over an infinite time, knowing who and what he was.

They take somebody — I'm talking now about the healing sciences — they take somebody with arthritis. They shoot them full of gold shots and they massage them and they shake them in a bag — I don't know what they do to them — and they work him over one way or the other. And these people curl up a little more and a little more and a little more. Occasionally some terrific thing occurs and they get well — you know, bang! sort of, get well. Well, this bang-get-well idea is something that has haunted the healing sciences for many, many centuries. They felt that there must be a button — there just must be a button — if people suddenly would recover from things. It never occurred to them that they might be, all of a sudden, confronting another being who wasn't sick. Think of that for a moment. The sudden recovery might very well be another being who wasn't sick, because all a life form would have to do, or a life unit would have to do, rather, would be to change its mind about who it was and just abandon all connection with and responsibility for anything and everything it had been, which would come down toward amnesia and so forth, and say, "Well, I'm not that person anymore; I am somebody else."

Now we drop way down scale and we get the condition which evidently exists on this planet at this time, which is, the individual gets born, he says, "I'm a body"; he says, "Now I'm a dead body, now I'm somebody else, now I'm a dead body, now I'm somebody else, now I'm . . ." — he gets confused after a while. And in one of the healing sciences — heh! ... By the way, I've had to invent that. You know, Korzybski — quite a man, Korzybski; wonderful guy, the late Alfred Korzybski — he had a little symbol: He put quotes. You know, when a word didn't quite mean what it was supposed to mean and you meant to exaggerate its meaning or something of the sort, why, you'd put little "quote, unquote." I think he was the sole author of that. I mean, it's gotten into popular ken now. You hear somebody in ordinary conversation say, "Well, I'm pretty (quote) 'hep' (unquote)," so on. Well now, that's a little symbol there. Well, I've had another one which is — which means, "Heh!" And I've been using that as a — similarly to the use of "quote, unquote," you know — "heh!" You say it like that; you say, "psychology — heh!" you know. That means, "I am not seriously uttering this word."

We see this in religion. We see somebody walk up to the front of the room to Aimee Semple McPherson or some other great spiritual leader, and we see this person walk up to the front of the room and all of a sudden he said, "Wow! I'm saved!" And Aimee or somebody says, "Roll again," and ... (audience laughter) What exactly has happened? Well, we've had a remarkable communication change but we've also had an identity change. We've had an identity change on the part of the person.

So anyway, here we have this science of — heh! — psychiatry, talking about multivalent personalities. Would you please explain to me how an individual could keep from getting mixed up about who he is if every few years he insists on kicking the bucket and being somebody else? And what a perfect control that individual would have to have of his position on the time track to always know who he was at the time.

Now, you could say, "I am not (my name)" — see, "I am not (your name)" — "I'm somebody else," and if you were very good at this, you could actually make it stick. You know? You could say, "I am no longer Oswald. My name is Joe and I live in Keokuk." What would happen to the chronic somatic? Well, if he did it to change the chronic somatic, he'd still have it. That's the most fascinating thing.

So we get all sorts of weird things. We get an individual who is going along fine, and a fellow just told me something here — he said the head of the mental health division went — has taken up house robbing up in New York City. Well, of course! Mental health — heh! — division. Now, this fellow's been going along being the judge, being the judge, being the judge, being the judge, being the judge, being the judge, being the judge and one day, he did just eighteen thousand too many overt acts, you see, and he found himself the victim. Well now, that is a valence shift from win to lose. But where does this fellow get the complete package of being a burglar? Out of the fellows he's been talking to?

Now, we're not talking — we're talking about a chronic somatic; we're not talking about a psychosomatic illness. We've too long confused these things. A chronic somatic is simply a sensation; sex could be called a chronic somatic. The point is that to have a sensation is not necessarily to be ill. You know, a lot of people believe that's the case, you know — if they have a sensation they're sick: "Something must be wrong with me, I have some feeling in my nose!" And we say these sensations are good and we say they're bad.

Now there is the primary error that has been made. We say we go into Father's valence. We say we go into Mother's valence. And these valences are all very well, but how do they become so expertly, completely packaged so that a person knows far more about how to be Father and how to be Mother and how to be a house burglar or a Mental Health — heh! — Division Chief than he would ever know in standing and talking to one? Here you stand, you've talked to your father — you just know that it's impossible probably to understand your father, or maybe you understand him too well. But you talk to him a long time — how do you pick up every single quirk this individual has? Or are you picking up every single quirk he has, or are you simply skidding on the track into a whole packaged identity you have which matched Father's identity? Which is it? Possibly could be any of it. That's an interesting thought, isn't it? That you have the ability to reassume any identity which you have already had. And that you can assume any identity which you have had again, if it is restimulated by the presence of a similar identity.

I processed a little girl one time, and she — about halfway through the session (we weren't processing what she was worried about, we were just getting her located and so forth) — and she all of a sudden looked at me and she said, "Wow!"

Did you ever know somebody, every time he talked to a tramp, he became a tramp; every time he talked to a cop he became a cop; every time he talked to anything he became that. But all of a sudden one day he's talking to a housewife and he just can't understand that. Well, he just never happens to have been one. But he has been a tramp or a judge or a cop or something. So it's a very easy thing. So he has two sources: He has this valence proposition — you know, just a stimulation–restimulation where he just shifts valence, you might say, right out of the engram bank. The safest thing to be when you're in the dentist's chair is the dentist and not yourself, and he can sort of shift valence into the dentist. He can pick up the dentist's bag of tricks one way or the other, but quite something else is also operative. The fellow may have a whole past life as a dentist.

And I said, "What's the matter?"

Now, I'm not asking you to accept transmigration of the human soul. I'm merely saying you better had — since man didn't start to go to pieces until he forgot about it.

And she said, "Do you know, I've had a headache."

All right. Here we have an individual, then, playing this cute little game: the glorious irresponsibility of being a baby. "Da-da, gaga — I don't know anything." But if you look real quick at a baby and if you don't pull your punches around the baby with what you're talking about, you'll get response — you'll get response. You can say the darnedest things to babies, which of course they can't understand, because — oh, this is the biggest joke in the world. Back in the old days of Dianetics, why, the medicos used to come around and say, "It's impossible for anybody to remember birth because there's no myelin sheathing on a baby's nerves." I never found out what this stuff is, but as near as I can figure out, their picture of a baby is a coil of telephone cable. But anyway, the baby can't remember. Who's asking him to remember? Nobody asked this body to remember anything, but there's somebody there and there's something there which is doing remembering and it doesn't happen to have any myelin sheathing, or need any.

"Oh?" I says.

Now it's quite remarkable — other thing — you talk to children, around them and so forth, and they apparently are paying no attention. But what's paying no attention? Their body's paying no attention. Well, their body is incapable of paying attention unless something's there saying, "Look" or "Listen." And the body's going through random motions. That doesn't mean that this person is not listening. This doesn't mean that this person has no capabilities of listening. But this person does have the capability of forgetting. And as life goes on with him, he says, "It's far, far better to be this little boy or this little girl than that old man or that old woman I once was." And so he says, "Now I've forgotten all that and that's gone."

"Yes," she said, "I've had a headache for years, only I didn't know what a headache was, and all of a sudden I haven't got a headache!" She sat there thinking about this. She said, "How am I going to get my headache back?"

When we are investigating phenomena of various kinds, we leave unaccounted for 99 and 44/100ths percent of the mental phenomena known to the human race, if we discount the factor of continuous life-to-life existence and a human spirit. In other words, the finest way in the world to find out nothing about the mind would be to just discount all this parade of lives and to discount at the same time the existence of a spirit, and say we're all machines. And in that way, you would happily dispose of practically every possible explanation. And then you could really be in mystery. You could really get lost, then. So that's where they've been getting lost. They disposed of these two factors and we've had mystery ever since. All right.

Now, Lord knows — Lord knows what a headache was to her. I don't know. Maybe it was a delightful sensation! Who knows?

Everybody knows it's very, very dangerous to fool around with your mind.

We found in reviewing, in the healing sciences, the work of Freud — we discovered something very fascinating: that he had people all categorized, and there have been lots of them ever since. And he had them all lined up and the masochist was the interesting one — he evidently enjoyed pain; he enjoyed being beaten and so forth. Freud describes him. Personally I've never met anyone who was a masochist, but I've met a lot of people who hoped they were. (audience laughter) And we have to ask of this: What is the degree of pain? What is this degree of pain? What do they call pain? It's an interesting thing. A fellow comes in and he says, "Oooh, my hip's killing me!" What is it? A little quiver or an agonizing ache? Now, every individual has his tolerance of pain but we are all too prone to assume that pain is a finite quantity which is measurable.

Everybody knows this. We all agree with this. And I agree with this, too. And I believe this, too. It is very, very dangerous to fool around with a nonexistent something. It is only safe to fool around with those things which do exist — namely, a thetan. That is fairly safe. But if you fool around with nonexistences such as the think . This is a nonexistence: the thinkingness of his myelin sheathing.

Now, we meet somebody else and he is screaming, he is writhing, he is getting down on the floor and chewing the rug because he tapped his finger lightly with a nail file. Now, you've known people that just superexaggerate any sensation.

You know, the electronic-brain boys are great boys. I like them — they're practical. One of them wrote a book the other day — I know this fellow — he wrote a book on the subject of communication. And I read the first pages, and — how can anybody write this uncommunicably about communication? What was communication to this electronic-brain boy? What was communication? It was the impedance in an electric circuit — the amount of resistance in the circuit was communication — all done with calculus incorrectly used where another mathematics would have served much better. It was the most horribly botched job I ever saw in my life! How could he stand to do this?

Now, we commonly think of — again, referring to the work of Freud — we commonly think of sex, and we popularly think of it and so on, as a pleasant series of sensations. I mean, this is more or less definition: supposed to be something desirable and attainable. Maybe this sensation called sex, to a great many people, is intensely painful. And they know it's intensely painful to them and at the same time they are assuming, because everybody else knows that it's pleasurable, that it ought to be pleasant, you see. And they would get into a rather dreadful state of mind about this situation because it would mean they were different than other people, or there was something changed or altered about life — and the funny part of it is, maybe we're all under the same delusion! See? Maybe there's just a popular belief sitting out here that has nothing to do with any of us that says sex is pleasurable, and maybe it hurts everybody. You see how quickly we can go adrift when we start to classify this situation.

Now, there's a psychiatrist that did write a pretty good book on communication. It's down in the library. It's not a bad book at all on communication. It's kind of tangled up, he can't solve anything with it, but its about communication. And it's a pretty good book for a psychiatrist. That's a pretty stinking compliment, isn't it? I have to be honest. I would be very happy to grant the man a lot of beingness, and he says it's a great book on communication. It would be a great book on communication if it put everybody into better communication. That'd be a good book — it's not. All right.

Now I am fascinated with the fact that one man's experience, described, is apparently understood by another man. This is the most fabulous thing that you could possibly view. Here you have an individual, a personality, and he himself does not have inherently (except as he would make it with postulates) time or space or energy or mass. He apparently has no slightest logical method of creating those things in such a way as to go into communication with some other such unit. And these two people talk gaily together and one of them says, "I have a terrible pain." And the other one of them says, "Oh, I've had an illness similar to that." If you listen to human beings, they talk this way. They go into a hotel — the hospital room, you know, they walk into this hospital room and there's this fellow lying there and he's in a beautiful state of somnolence — he's practically in an hypnotic trance, you see. And they say, "My brother had an illness just like yours. He went on just like you are going and they told him he was getting better and he was getting better, but he died." Have you ever been in a hospital and had visitors? Well, anyway — always happens. It's quite remarkable.

The electronic-brain boy completely omits this interesting factor — he completely omits it. And that is that his beautiful machine with its coffee-grinder handles and its big slots and its mechanical banks and its feeders and its thousands and thousands and thousands of tubes and transistors and resistors has to have somebody there to tell it what its goals are! And its goals had to be built into it by somebody. And somebody has to receive the answer. There is no single part in an electronic brain which, after the little card or tape falls out, says, "Ah!" So when we take out this little element that says "Ah!" what have we got? We've got some wheels that go round and round without any meaning at all. And we get the most senior characteristic of life — the ability to put meaning into and take meaning from other life units, life forms, spaces, energies, objects and time. And that is the best thing in living that it does. Of course, there is something else that it does up above that, and that's it makes postulates. Makes a postulate and makes them stick or unstick.

Now, nobody would do that if he never got a kickback of what he was doing to other people. Would he? That's an interesting fact. People wouldn't go around butchering people with words or swords if there was any slightest recoil, if it could happen to them, now would they? They wouldn't do that. So obviously nothing can happen to a person as a result of having made an effect out of another person. Isn't this obvious?

But this is not a third dynamic operation, this making of postulates — not necessarily at all. Here we have the business of living, the game called life. And this game called life has as its highest manifestation, a manifestation higher than logic. It's an interesting thing, but we have gone above logic today with Scientology and so we have exceeded its definition as a science. You'll see what happens when we run Meaningness Processing — what happens to your logic. That's wonderful. Putting meaning into and taking meaning out of things, objects, spaces, people, situations, times, energies, masses — the most senior thing it does.

Well, this is a great oddity. That must be an agreement, too. The recoil itself must be an agreement. "One of the best ways I know," somebody says, "to protect myself from damage is to enforce the agreement upon those who would attack me that they will suffer in some mystic and mysterious way because of their activities agin me." Now, that's an interesting agreement, isn't it? But what a wonderful protective mechanism! Or is it mechanically a fact? These are mysteries. These are mysteries very germane to the field of religion. Is it a mechanical fact that if you go out and cut off Gertrude's head, you'll at least have a pain in your throat? Is that a mechanical fact?

Actually, one of the total battles of life is the battle of who's going to put meaning into it. It's the only reason these judges sit on benches. They've got to be the one who puts meaning into it.

Well, if you're going to be in communication with anybody anywhere, it happens to be a mechanical fact. But basically it was probably an idea of a wonderful way to restrain. But it has gone so much further than just a wonderful way to restrain that you could absolutely count on the fact, going down here to a taxi driver and start in convincing this hard-boiled fellow that he had harmed you, and he would go into apathy. You actually could do this, if you worked on it long enough.

The only way you can learn anything from life is be willing to have somebody else give some meaning, too. Now this ascends — transcends the granting of beingness. So we're really getting there. This is a process which leads further and does more, by far, than the granting of beingness, and exceeds logic — so we must be getting somewhere in Scientology.

One of the interesting things to do to a human being as a little test of this — an interesting test, too (how solid can an agreement be, is what I'm talking about) — is we take a dog. A dog doesn't think, he just reacts, according to one of the sciences called — hah! — psychology. And I had a dog once that could think — he had me figured out. Anyway, we take this dog, and it's a very funny thing, but these mechanisms are so exact that we can make this dog go into propitiation by screaming and running away from him. Now, the dog comes up and he nibbles at the cuff of your trousers or your wrist or something like that and you say, "Ow! Stop! Don't!" You know? He didn't hurt you at all, and you say, "Don't! Don't! Get away!" and you turn around and you start to run away and so forth. And the dog will get real brave — oh! And if he's in pretty good shape he'll just get awfully brave, and then all of a sudden he'll say, "You know, maybe I hurt him." And he'll come over and he'll lick your wrist — he'll look at you real worried.

Now, that is the high tide of current research and investigation — the discovery of those principles and facts and their uses in processing. It's all a nicely done job right now.

This is the foulest trick you can play on a little kid. The cycle of action of a little kid in this regard is quite interesting. A little kid, swatting away at you, you know — normal childhood reaction — pasting you around one way or the other; you all of a sudden say, "Ow! That hurt! Don't! Stop that now, that hurt!" Kid look at you, probably come over and look at you, kiss the spot to make it well — kid's worried. You've zinged him down Tone Scale to a propitiation and concern over having injured another. Only there was no pain involved. Now do you see where we're going? You can do this. You can do this to anyone. And there's no pain involved.

But what's this have to do with the Tone Scale? Has a great deal to do with the Tone Scale. We always knew that there was some level on the Tone Scale which would exceed logic; because logic is an agreed-upon pattern of thought which follows — bing, bing, bing — by gradient scale from one subject to another subject and brings about an association amongst meaningnesses. And that's logic.

I wonder if there's any pain involved anywhere? Well, there isn't, unless you have to convince somebody. Now let's take this mechanism — let's look this mechanism over very carefully and let's have this little kid — this is a tough little mug; he comes from Park Avenue. (audience laughter) And this very tough little mug, he comes over and he says, "Nyarrrh, you big sis," and so forth, and he hauls off and swats you one. And you say, "Ow! Don't do that! Hey you, you hurt. Don't, now!" And he says, "Ha-ha!" you know, and bang! bang! hits you some more. By the way, when they're pretty stuck and pretty aberrated, they'll keep on a persistence along this line and they'll hit you around and so forth, and you know what you'd have to do? You'd probably have to turn on a bleeding wrist to show him — say, "Look, see what you did." And the kid would say, "Gee! I really didn't mean to ruin you." See, now he's convinced.

Therefore, we would believe that as we ran up the Tone Scale and got up toward 40.0 on the Tone Scale, we would get out of this associative trick. And we have done so. Meaningness breaks down this associative trick and makes a person capable of associating or not associating at his will, knowingness and command.

The problem is, what degree of energy or mass is necessary to convince? How much pain does it take to convince somebody else that you have been hurt? How much pain would you have to turn on to convince some son of the devil? How many swellings and malformations would you have to turn on to convince this person that he ought to go down Tone Scale to be nice? Are we talking about the same mechanism?

And so Book One had some rightness about it — had some rightness about it. The Tone Scale did have a point where differentiation was much, much higher and more workable than association. So we have gone much higher than we have gone before. There is a point, then, on the Tone Scale of independent existence which isn't simply the postulate — that's way up: You simply make a postulate and something occurs; you make another postulate and it un-occurs. That's an unimaginably high level; it's almost ungraspable by the routine preclear. But this Meaningness Processing is not, and it lies below that level. So we're building a bridge on this up to that high level of make a postulate, unmake it and so forth, and part of that postulate scheme as it winds up there, falls down into meaningness. Now we've got this lower level.

All right, here is one of the interesting things. We have this person fighting and he's got a spear, and he lunges and we say, "Ow! Hey! That's dangerous! Don't!" and so forth. And he draws back — because he's being paid to do it by some government — he lunges again with this spear. Well, if we just let him come in close and nick us, he's liable to stop. But if that doesn't work, then the next — you see, there's no reason why we should be inaccurate at all, no reason why we shouldn't just get run through in the first place; we can be accurate that way as well as be accurate in stabbing people. All right. And the next time that he lunges, well, we have to get bunged up a little bit more. And finally when we're lying there in a mass and welter of blood and battered armor, this fellow says, "Ha-ha! Poor fellow. Well, he was a worthy fighter," and walks away. What did it take? It took almost a complete destruction of the mock-up to convince this other person that he has harmed or done wrong, and that is death.

Now let's go down a little lower on the Tone Scale and let's describe this thing a little bit better. We've got this terrifically imaginative, high-flown level of serenity where the individual, exteriorized in no universe, simply says, "Let there be light" and bang! there's light. "I want it dark" — bang! there's darkness, as something else than he had before, see. He's all set now, see, he can go on and make a universe. But that's awfully high. That is such a high principle that man has assigned that attribute only to God.

So after a person has lived through a number of incidents of one kind or another, he comes at last to the realization that the only way he could really convince others that they had better regard him a little better — since he cannot seem to enjoin it with the sword in his own hand, he puts the sword in theirs and dies, then you have this wonderful mechanism called death. And that's how to really get even with somebody.

All right. Let's come down scale and get amongst us — heh! — amongst us Theta Exteriors. And what have we got? First level down from the top is meaningness. You got an object, what's it mean? It's what it says it means; it's what you say it means; you're what it says you mean — any way you want to play it. And then we go down and we get an agreed-upon set of meaningnesses, and we get logic. And there is our first level of thinking as we know thinking.

Ask some little five-year-old kid sometime, "Did you ever wish you were dead? Did you ever wish you were dead?"

Now, thinking is an agreed-upon association of ideas — an agreed-upon associating of ideas leading along certain gradient scales to the production of certain answers and conclusions. In other words, it's a slow way to make a postulate. And it's a good way to justify having made one.

"Did I ever wish I was dead, are you crazy? Of course I've wished I was dead. That'd make them sorry!"

But we come down below that and we come down below logic and we get into another interesting process. And that process is covered quite adequately in Dianetics 1955! — that process is simply communication. Whether it's "Hellos and Okays" or "That's the way it is" or anything of the sort, communication lies below logic. Actually has no dependency on logic, but nevertheless lies above any level of energy, space, mass. So look at all the levels we have now above universes.

Get some seven- or eight-year-old little girl sometime — and it'd be absolutely impossible, I'm sure, to find one who was in fairly good condition anywhere who would not be able to list you a dozen such incidents. There she would be lying in a coffin, flowers — that'd fix them! That'd convince them they should have been nicer to her! They all should have been nicer to her, or to him.

Communication is above universes — because it destroys them, so therefore it must be senior to them. It makes them or breaks them, so it must be senior to universes.

You could take some little kid and you can ask him to repeat over and over, "They should have been nicer to me." Just that, see — just ask him to repeat this over and over with no former description or comment of any kind — and what are you going to get? He'll start to cry. Just like that. He's already gotten himself two feet deep into the grave, just by repeating this thing: "They should have been nicer to me."

If you just have a fellow — say he's got a bad leg. Now we know that if we move masses around and try to combine with operations and steel tubes and other medical remedies this bad leg, we know we're going to get a persistence of the condition. We conceive this to be fairly inevitable. But if we have this fellow sit there and have his leg say hello to him and he says hello to his leg — just this kind of a drill; nothing fancier than that — he will experience changes in the legs which does not carry with it any great responsibility of change, you see. The leg will change. Something will happen to the masses of that leg. That's a cinch. So we're above the level of the behavior of masses, spaces and energies if we have thought alone handling them.

Now let's say that we're going to address fatally — that we were going to address a chronic somatic: some persistent ache, pain or sensation or malformation or condition, or condition of living. We were going to address any one of these — chronic condition — and we would find that if we had the person repeat over and over, "They should have been nicer to me," this condition will turn on more and more and more. If we're merely treating the fact that he can't earn a living or something of the sort, he'll get worse at it. You know, he'll get even poorer. If we're trying to get him over a broken leg or something of the sort, why, it will start hurting and he will develop complications. This we are sure of.

Now, any religious leader in any time would have given away his finest mountain, his very best cassock (or hassock or whatever they wear), if he could have demonstrated that thought was senior to masses and wealth and swords and matter. Now, he knew this instinctively. He'd see these armies clashing with armies and these populaces struggling, these palaces building, and he could become philosophic about it. And he knew there was something that was superior to all this. But all he did was say, "It is superior. The spirit, the concerns of the spirit, are superior." And when he'd gone completely into apathy, he then began to say, "The mind has something to do with it." He no longer dared quite say, "It is a spiritual manifestation." He said, "It's some kind of a mechanical gimmick that works this out" — and we got the first psychologist. He said, "The mind is a pretty mighty thing." See, that's way down scale.

This is the spirit affecting the body, and the thetan running the anatomy and the machine. It's proof, conviction, convincingness. And when they fail with ideas, they make the ideas solid, and we have mass.

Let's look at this other, though. Supposing this person wishing to demonstrate this, had at his command just one function that a spirit could perform — just one — and by its performance could demonstrate that all masses, spaces and objects were apparently, at least, junior to thought; because thought could be seen to erase them, eradicate them, change them, alter their persistence and characteristics. And we, today, have that in Scientology. And we have it in communication.

What's mass? Mass is an idea that has failed. And it has been changed many times, and heavens, is it persisting! And if you want it to persist some more, roll it around some more.

Let me tell you something that happened. Fellow came in — he wanted to make a big bargain with the HASI. He wanted to make a big bargain. He wanted — I don't know — eight or nine thousand hours of processing or something, and pay us at the end of the time if he could see any visible results. Well, I'd looked at this sort of thing before and I told one of the boys to go ahead — give him twenty-five hours and kiss him goodbye, because he obviously is going to swindle us one way or the other.

Now there's really two levels on the Tone Scale. Above 2.0 is survival. Below 2.0 is succumb. In other words, above this artificial, arbitrary figure of 2.0, we have the goal of an individual is to survive. See, that's survival is there. But below that level — and please grasp this fact, please, because it makes things so much easier for the auditor — below that level, the goal is to succumb. Now, we have a percentile of goal. In other words, somebody wants to 70 percent succumb and 30 percent survive, and so we get a very conflicting state of mind, as we could call it colloquially — state of mind. (I don't know what a state of mind would be. Call it an arrangement of ideas, and you would come much closer.) All right. So this person wants to succumb some percentage and survive another percentage.

The fellow was incapable in processing, by the way, of thinking an independent thought. He couldn't think a thought. You would say, "Think a thought" and that'd be the end of him. He was rough — rough shape. But he had two eyes which were both blue with cataracts, and one of which — the left — had no vision in it at all. So we just set him up on the research line — poor auditor. I said to the auditor, "Dick, I want you to give 'Hellos and Okays' to that eye for twenty-five hours. And only the left eye, Dick, not the right."

Now we go down Tone Scale and we find out this person wants to succumb 90 percent and wants to survive 10 percent. Well, there's not much conflict there. One of the first things this fellow will think of, in terms of himself, is how he could kill himself — if he could think about himself at that level. If he thought about you, he would think kind of how he could kill you, and we get the criminal bands; quite interesting manifestation. Once a person has failed to convince the society around him of his worth, he is liable to take the course, the downward spiral, into levels of succumb which require murder or death as the only sufficient proof — criminality. He cannot have, he has to steal. It's covert havingness; stealing is just covert havingness. And he has to butcher, make nothing of, chew up, slap around anyone in his vicinity. He can't afford to be nice to them. Why can't he? Well, he knows the best thing for everybody: that's succumb.

This was no intention whatsoever to alter the person's spiritual outlook or beingness. The sole and entire intention was simply to demonstrate, one way or the other — not to the fellow, but to the Research Department — that communication was senior to any healing or masses or spaces or considerations of any kind. This fellow couldn't even put up a tough enough consideration to bar this from happening.

It's just as you run on an individual some process of duplication, and have him then run this process on some body part, like an ear. You know? "Get the idea, now, of the goals of your ear." You know? "What are the goals of this ear?" you know, and you go on. The first thing you run into is — one of the first things you run into is: "Gee, let's everybody be ears!" That's what this ear thinks, you know: "Everybody's got to be an ear!" Big toe thinks, "Everybody should be a big toe." And this person thinks, "Everybody should be dead." And we get that wonderful philosophy, that glorious ornament to the thinkingness of the human race, Will and the Idea, by a guy named Schopenhauer who conceived out of the greatness of his Germanic wisdom and out of the deduction of reduction to absurdity, that the best possible thing for the human race would be for everybody and everything to quit and stop it in its tracks and that would be the end of that! And that's the best thing to do!

It was his service facsimile. He didn't want to lose that any more than he wanted to lose his wife and farm and town. He needed those cataracts and that blind eye. He knew that. He was convincing somebody of something. And an auditor sits there calmly and dispassionately without anything else for twenty-five hours and has hellos and okays going between himself and that eye, and at the end of twenty-five hours the man could see with that eye and it had no cataract. But the right eye still had its cataract complete. Black magic — or a higher level of religious performance than man has been accustomed to.

[At this point there is a gap in the original recording.]

Now, of course, if Dick had been hotter than he is, undoubtedly Dick would simply have had to have said, "Aleikum salaam, presto cataract gone-o," and the guy would have gotten immediate change and consideration on the Cadillac and the preclear would have drove off in a hayrick, stone stark staring mad. This you could have been fairly certain of — this would have been such a shock. Well, Dick didn't do that. He merely took the cataract out of the man's eye.

But that's still higher toned than a Hitler who says, "Now, let's see, the best way for Germans to live is to kill everybody." Because the universe is so set together that an individual who goes out to kill everybody, dies himself. There is a retribution. There is a rapid and exact retribution for one's acts.

By the way, the preclear had not been changed. We had changed him physically but he had not been changed spiritually to any degree whatsoever. He came in at the end of the week and he says, "Well, I want more processing. My wife, who was violently opposed to Scientology last week, having watched this, insists that I get more processing now. And I want more processing. And I want processing until I can see some visible result." His wife, his auditor, everybody at the Guidance Center, the Registrar and so forth, all witness to the fact that this has really changed, you know, and he said, "I have no visible result. I can see my hand now in front of my face with this eye and I have no visible results if processing is doing me any good whatsoever." No. He was talking exactly the same way as he was talking the first day he walked in — really mixed-up, incapable of receiving a proof or observing a fact or noting any change of any kind. So nothing had changed about the person, we had simply changed an eye.

If a person thinks he can be happy without making those around him happy, he's crazy. Now, I beg your pardon, that's a technical term which belongs in the field of psychiatry. It is the total and sole proprietary matter of psychiatry. But this fellow is crazy anyhow.

What's startling about this? It's startling in that it isn't being done every day. That's what makes things startling. And it's our goal and mission to make it much less startling in the very near future.

Now, here is a great oddity, then: that there is an interaction from human being to human being, and this interaction follows an agreed-upon pattern for there to be sustained any communication at all. If we are going to sustain any communication or concourse with our fellows, then we become liable to all of the laws, rules and offshoots of communication. And if we do not feel ourselves strong enough, wise enough, competent or able enough to support these liabilities, then we have no business whatsoever living with the human race, but should find ourselves a nice little cave someplace back of the Atlas or somewhere and sit down and live on goat milk.

Now, our business is not medicine. That's a fairly low level of operation that has to do with patch-up, rehabilitation. And here we have, however, something far more important: We can demonstrate today that thought, and an action of thought, is senior to matter. That little experiment is just one of many.

Now, an individual could not help but come to that conclusion that hecould not sustain communication — he could not help but conclude that it would be impossible for him to go on communicating with all these people — if he himself believed that everybody, or at least a lot of bodies, should die.Now, you follow this? The individual who has to go and find himself a cage or a cave would be somebody who had already come to the conclusion that everybody else must die. Why? Because talking to people gives him a kind of dyingness, which tells you immediately what the intent of his communications must be. If by talking to people, he himself experiences dyingness, he must then intend no good for his fellows; but quite on the contrary, if turned loose and let go just a little bit, he'll get that sword nice and sharp and get to work.

We can upset a preclear considerably by making the walls disappear for him, just by using communication. If you were to set a preclear down and have him simply have the walls say hello and he says okay, and then he says hello and the wall says okay, and you keep this up back and forth, various things will happen to his case, this is certain. But after a while something — he's going to get into a level where something's going to start happening to that wall. If he's in horrible shape, maybe it'd take seventy-five or a hundred hours of such an exercise to finally bring him up to a point where something started to happen to the wall. But something's going to happen to the wall.

It's that individual, and the restraint of that individual, which brings about the condition known as police — who, in a rational, sane society, are about as useful as bubonic plague. And yet we're taught that if there weren't police in the society, everybody'd get murdered. Well now, this is a great deal of confidence in our fellow man, isn't it? Whose conclusion is it? It must be the conclusion of a person whose intent and goal is to murder everybody — to show them. So therefore, the idea of restraint, the idea of restriction, barrier and breaking off, must perforce spring from people who had better be barriered.

I well recall a DScn in Phoenix. He's very, very good — exterior — and he was doing a very nice job of auditing around and so on. And I showed him how to as-is a molecule. You know, you get exactly — you make an exact duplicate of it at the place with the material and with the consideration with which it was made. And we made an exact duplicate of a molecule and the molecule goes pffsst! All right. I said, "Now let's take a corner of that brick. Now make an exact duplicate of every molecule, atom or electron or proton that you find there. Make an exact duplicate."

The feeling that one is being mauled around by the society is not an unnatural feeling. It is when that feeling amounts to the conclusion that in order to survive, one has no other course but to maul around everyone, that one becomes lost to himself and to all others and had better go find that cave.

Being exterior, he goes over, you know . . . "Hey!" There was a chip gone out of the top corner of the brick. Now if we'd kept it up .. .

Here are the liabilities of communication. All by himself with no space, no energy, no matter, the individual theoretically could survive in a timeless state which would persist forever. It's a paradox, isn't it? Theoretically, he could do this. Theoretically, one could be in a condition which desired no communication, which wanted no concourse, which needed none, and which wouldn't even know about any. Theoretically, that condition can exist.

It's a very interesting thing, the old, old story of the line of mice, you know — or cockroaches or whatever it is in the fairy tale — that go into the silo and each one carries out a grain of wheat. I suppose that would be one way to get the job of making this universe vanish — if that was one's job — come about. You know, just sort of chip away, atom by atom, molecule by molecule. I suppose something would happen eventually.

But if there is communication, we have to have, first and foremost, two terminals. Even when a fellow is talking to himself, he still has to say part of himself is somebody else. So we're talking about a two-terminal condition. And the moment we have a two-terminal condition and communication, we have a universe in construction. And if that universe sweeps along in its construction to where communication seems to be unbearably painful to the majority of its inhabitants, somebody'd better as-is it.

But the point is, Muhammad (and that is not Muhammad, by the way, that's another one) didn't come to the mountain or go to the mountain or anything of the sort — the religious leader didn't — but there was another fellow, a monk, who couldn't make the mountain move. And we hope to get good enough one of these days so that he could have used this. You see, you just as-is it where it is, psheww! — which is no mountain — and mock it up where you are. It's actually in the tradition of religion that these things can occur. And in Scientology, we're moving forward with very solid technologies (not mysteries) that demonstrate their occurrence, which is a fantastic thing. All right.

Here we have a condition here of the only panacea — the only real panacea in mechanical terms — for space and energy, matter and time: communication. It is the sole curative element which can dependably change, alter and eradicate, without penalty, space, energy and matter.

Now let's take something much more important and much more factual on this Tone Scale. We have come down to a point which is senior to spaces, energies and masses. We have two specific, highly workable processes which are above these levels. One of them is communication, just as such. And the other one is Meaningness Processing. And we all know about postulates — so there's actually three processes above any level where we have anything like a universe.

What happens to a person who shuns it? What quality of black glass does his bank become? What happens to an individual who says — having already assumed communication and having gone into communication — now says, "Communication, that makes me feel bad. I don't like that. It's too painful to talk; it's too horrible to contemplate. I've got to draw barriers here and secretaries there and cut telephone wires over here and tom-up mail over in this corner." He's on his way. Where? Well, one thing — he's on his way to believing that everybody is going to be after him and at the same time, to the conclusion that he had better be after everybody. In other words, a Wall Street man.

But when we come down and get into masses, spaces, energies, time and so forth, we drop lower on, and lower on, the Tone Scale to the degree that we get into more masses, more energies, more spaces and more time. And we get a foreverness at the bottom of the Tone Scale, which is an interesting thing — that is not suddenly appeared. That is a foreverness, that mass which you see. It's a foreverness persisting. The trick is, it has no time in it. It doesn't have time in it, and so of course it persists.

Now, this condition is not particularly perilous. But we go four or five harmonics down this Tone Scale, we get into a condition which is very interesting indeed. We get to your political fascist, your criminal, the insane, the psychiatrist. We get to people who have to use mass in a violent way in order to convince any-body of anything.

You have time to the degree that you postulate it. And if you depend on this stuff to give you the time, you will very shortly have no time at all. Because it has no time and you will have duplicated it. And thus we get the fellow rushing around in circles saying he has no time to do anything, he has no time to play, he has no time to work, he has no time, no time, no time, no time. We'll find out this fellow's very MESTy, he's very solid with regard to existence. He's duplicating the physical universe with no time. If we just have him make some time for a while, he'll come out of this.

The Chinese know this very well. I, once upon a time, heard a little story about the Chinese. There were two coolies, two rickshaw boys, and they had drawn up in the street and they'd dropped their rickshaws and they were going "Nee-chongy-tonky-alamonpinyon," and — at each other and screaming back and forth. And an American was standing there with a Chinese friend and he watched this conversation going on and on — on. He finally turned around to his Chinese friend and he says, "Hey," he says, "what's the matter with those guys? Why don't they fight?"

We say, "All right, invent some time." Or "Make some time. And make some time. Make some time. Make some more time. Make some more time." He's liable to comm lag on it by the hour before he finally gets down to a point to where he understands your question. But then he starts postulating time, you see. And as soon as he starts postulating time, he then has time, and starts coming up Tone Scale.

"Oh," his Chinese friend says, "the fellow who strikes first blow confess he run out of ideas!"

But one of the characteristics of the Tone Scale is that as you go down scale, less and less time is postulated and more and more time is apparent. See? We're getting away from the postulate, and at the exact bottom of the scale, on a level of unimaginable depth, there wouldn't even be a universe there anymore because people wouldn't have the sensibility sufficient to perceive it. And we've noticed that fairly well up scale before we get to that, a thetan stops perceiving the universe. He stops perceiving it because he stops putting it there. And when he no longer puts it there, he can't perceive it. And you get somebody three feet back of his head and he doesn't see any walls and he can't find his body and he doesn't know what it's all about and he's confused or he sees it all as blackness or shooting stars or something. There's nothing in the world wrong with him except he's just stopped putting the universe there. And of course it's not there unless he puts it there. There's no time there unless he puts it there. Time is a created thing. The manifestations of life are created by the thetan, they're not found by him.

So we have this interesting thing. We have an interesting thing here: We have the idea as sufficient unto itself, and then we have the idea which has to be backed up with some space and some energy and some mass, and then we have the idea which has to be backed up with lots of energy and lots of space and lots of mass, and then we have the idea which is so perilously and tenuously held that it has to be backed up by the consideration that space, energy and mass is bad and you're going to get it!

And as soon as we recognize this clearly, we begin to make wonderful progress. But more important, we begin to understand this thing called the Tone Scale. And the Tone Scale could be called "from the level of the postulate to the foreverness of lifelessness, a progress into space, energy, time and matter." The Tone Scale is a deeper and deeper progress into MEST. But the funny part of it is, when you hit the bottom, all MEST ceases. You can go out the bottom of the scale; you can go out the top of it. But these fellows who try to go out the bottom of it and take a body with them are rarely successful. Because the body won't go down that low.

When somebody tries to tell you how bad it is over there and how you're all going to be cut up and you're going to be sliced up and it's going to be horrible things happening to you and you're going to go to jail for 126 years and the jails are terrible and so on and when they start on along this line, this fellow's just confessed to you he's run out of ideas. Certainly effective ones — certainly effective ones.

Now let's take the next characteristic of this scale. The scale is a very wide scale for the thetan — the spirit. It goes from Lord knows what minus point to goodness knows what tremendous height. We could only guess at these things in terms of that and then set them down in MEST, because there's not enough MEST to set them down in. Because he goes down to a level where there isn't any, and he goes up to a point of where he can create it. All right. Then if we're talking about a spirit with this enormous band, we must be talking, really, about two sections of the same Tone Scale: we're talking about the body's position on the scale and the spirit's position on the scale. And we've got this tremendous scale where we have to do with the thetan; we've got this little tiny scale where it has to do with the body. And we demark on this Tone Scale the numbers 0.0 to 4.0 to more or less denote the boundaries of the body.

Now, people get into this state of being quite easily. They believe that the space and the energy and the mass is the important driving force, and that there is no more important driving force in this world than space and energy and mass. And they believe these are — things are just fabulous. And they believe, at the same time, that the greatest healer is time.

Now, the body is very well boundaried. It goes down in the earth a few miles or up into the air a few miles and it no longer exists. It gets a few degrees too hot or a few degrees too cold and it can no longer exist. It gets a little bit too much or a little bit too little oxygen and it no longer exists. Very fragile thing. Feed it too much or you feed it too little, you give it one one-millionth of an ounce of the latest psychiatric — huh! — cure; one one-millionth of ounce of a drug that we investigated many, many years ago called LSD, which is the new psychiatric cure: It makes everybody a schizophrenic. That's right. And it was just advised that everybody should use this now. No curative value known. But it does — when you give it to nurses in mental hospitals, it does give them a better insight into the patient. (audience laughter) Talk about descent into MEST!

Time is not the great healer; it is the great charlatan. Because time, mass, energy and space do not exist independent of the postulates of life. We're merely looking at another set of postulates represented with the urgency of conviction.

Anyway, the boundaries of the body are narrow. The body can command an awful lot of interest because it can be in so much peril. Turn on the gas for a couple of minutes in the house — body doesn't like it. You could be in a room as a spirit — a room totally filled with phosgene gas — and say, "(sniff-sniff) Phosgene gas."

So we have a problem here when we're looking at a human being. We have a problem. This human being has gotten into the interesting state of believing that he could convince nobody of his presence unless he hands up a body. The only way that can convince somebody you're there is to give them a body. Now, isn't that interesting? Think of it for a moment. It'll start to appear rather ridiculous to you. The only way you could convince anybody you were there, or that you were anybody, would be to present them with a body. We show them a body; that convinces them. It stands in space, it moves with energy, and it is mass — and they know you're there.

So we're looking, when we look at the body, at this fragility — great fragility. And Body Death is at 0.0 on this Tone Scale, and about the highest point the body reaches is maybe 5.0 in the extreme. Here's this tiny little scale. This huge Tone Scale and this tiny little scale.

If some of you are having a hard time trying to figure out how the devil they would know you were there unless you did present a body, be aware of this interesting thing: You must be trying to keep from being located.

The big advance about the Tone Scale — quite in addition to being able to demonstrate its positions on the upper scale — occurred, however, in the subzero Tone Scale, not in the body scale. The big advance has been between -8.0 and 0.0.

Think it over for a moment. If you think the only way you could make anybody else aware of your presence would be to present a body, then you're presenting some kind of a substitute over here and you're saying, "Hey," you know, "tsk, tsk, tsk. That's me. Ha-ha!" Big joke! Everybody says, "How are you, Mr. Jones?" you know, and so forth. And if Jones is up here not making himself known, he still must have the conviction that he mustn't be located; that something will happen to him if he's located.

Now, there are some fill-ins which are still accurate which occur on the minus zero scale of Scientology 8-80. That minus scale is still valid. But these new ones are so startling and so powerful and so much the key to exteriorization that it was necessary to crowd out the others — such as Approval from Bodies and so forth on the old subzero scale — and just put these new ones in. You'll see that on your plotting sheets.

And there we get the top peak of aberration, and that is the highest level of aberration: "There is something rather detrimental to being located. There is something slightly wrong with being located."

Now, what are these buttons on the minus zero Tone Scale? A spirit obviously can go lower down scale than Body Death. That's very obvious. Body dies, spirit might even stay in it but he'd still be alive, and then will exteriorize. But he's at a lower level than the body. He can see less well than the body. He can do all sorts of things less well than the body. And so he gets onto the minus scale. So Body Death is that high level of 0.0, and a thetan can go on down to -8.0.

"There's something slightly wrong with locating things" is your black V case. Not only slightly wrong: "I sure better locate nothing. I'd better not locate a thing. If I do any looking, I'm liable to see something, and if I see something, woooo!" But the funny part of it is, is there's no argument or reason at all that goes behind the woooo! but just that — woooo!

Well now, let's progress upward from -8.0, which is about as far south as you're going to find the thetan. Now he can get further south, but you're not going to find him. And that at -8.0 is Hide.

Now, you might accept this idea that fear of being located or dislike of being located or even tremendous desire to be located, such as your exhibitionist (and we've had lots of those since Freud invented them); these factors must contain in them a certain amount of truth if their use on the spirit of man and with his cooperation produces marked changes in his behavior, in his intelligence, in his ability, in his perception and his willingness to be perceived. And if we use these factors and produce marked changes in the ideas, personalities of people, and we better them and make them freer, then I feel that we must be talking somewhere close to truth. It is not necessarily true that we are speaking the truth; we are merely speaking the workability.

And just above Hide is Protect. Now, those are two old buttons, but they're quite important. How far south can you go? Hide. And when you come just a little bit north from that, you start to protect. That's as a thetan.

Truth is a very interesting thing, since the only way we get any persistence of any kind or any form or any energy or any mass is by changing it. Only if we alter truth do we get persistence. This is fabulous, but very true.

Now, when you get just a little bit above Protect, you get Own. Ownership. And there's where Ownership belongs. We're not up to Body Death yet. We get Ownership. And we go just a bit above Ownership and we get Responsibility — the idea of being responsible for. And we go just a little bit above Responsibility and we get Control. And we go just a little bit above Control and we get Body Death on this scale.

That means some pessimist is going to come along and he's going to think to himself now — he's going to think to himself, "You mean that everything at which I look has a lie in it?" Well, if you want to state it crudely, yes. If a lie can be defined as an alteration of truth, or a departure from the truest true you know, then that's perfectly true. The floor is there because it's a damned lie.

What's important about this? It's just this: that Ownership, Responsibility and the Start, Stop and Change of Control (see, control is start, stop and change) — just this — that Ownership, Responsibility and Control are the three buttons which are most pertinent to exteriorization. And these have been isolated.

But one can easily accustom himself to these lies. It's only when the individual becomes hectic and very upset about lies that stuff that is composed of lies goes out of his control.

And so if you can get a person up scale to a point where he can work with these buttons, it is a great certainty that you will exteriorize him one way or the other. In other words, a person is held down — a person is held down in a body by Hiding, Protection, Ownership, Responsibility, Control, then a little bit higher than that, Body Death.

Nor does this give anyone like Hitler a license to deal only in lies. If he deals only in lies, he'll as-is everything, too. He will bring about a condition of such persistency of lies that he won't have any truth left. You must always have a certain amount of truth left; because it is the alteration of truth which gives us persistence, which gives us survival. We must alter or repostulate truth. And if you alter lies and continue to alter lies, you get something else entirely different because you haven't got the first postulate to be followed by the second. Some truth must always be present, and it is only when no truth is left that we get the bad end of nothing.

Now, the only method of exteriorization known (as I will talk about later) to man at this time — or a little earlier (he doesn't know about it now — see, he doesn't know about exteriorization, but a little bit earlier he knew about it) and that was death.

Therefore, the lessons which we learn in processing today in Scientology are very, very interesting lessons. They bridge upon and across some of the greatest philosophic conundrums that have ever been advanced by man. What is justice? What is right? What is wrong? What is good behavior? What is bad behavior? There's many a person going around, the only thing that's wrong with them at all, that they conceive to be wrong with them, is that they can't quite figure out how it all ought to be. They see badness and viciousness and villainy on every side succeeding. They see this consistently. They see injustice, bought courts, they see perjury and false witnesses being rewarded on every hand. And something in them says that the only thing upon which this whole universe and all of us within it can possibly depend is truth. And truth, somehow, is decency and goodness and charity and mercy and kindness. They see this, and yet all they see rewarded is viciousness. And they get this sort of a conundrum in their heads and they just say, "Vr-rr-rr-rr-rr! I don't like it!"

How do you exteriorize? Well, you die, of course. And then you'll get out of the body. Simple. Boy, if that doesn't look like about the weakest line of self-determinism I ever heard ofl You mean you've got to kill this object called a body in order to get out of it? Well, what are you doing in it? How'd you get into that kind of a condition?

The only thing that's wrong with them is, is they have lost so much of their own basic truth that they are no longer able to combat an untruth. And the only thing you have to do with them is let them recover some of their basic truth; let them see that there is a reward for decency and kindness and justice and mercy and charity; let them see that these things are basic; let them see that communication is not bad, it's good; let them see that decency, honor are extant.

And yet do you know, actually, that there are people walking the streets today that do not know they are in a body? They believe they are a body. Now that's the darnedest thing! And there are a lot of other people walking the streets today who are in a body. Can you imagine anybody getting into a body? Why would you get into a body? It's all very well for you to say, "Well, the body grabbed me and pulled me in." But it seems to be a remarkable place to get yourself parked. You know, you'd have to think a long time to think of that. There are all kinds of places where you could get stuck — much more interesting, I'm sure. And you could also get in — stuck in other people's bodies, as far as that's concerned. But to be parked in the middle of a body or in its head or its left ear or two inches in front of its eyes or something like this, and stuck there, is one of the more remarkable things that could happen to a spirit. It is singular. It is remarkable. It takes a great deal of hard, earnest, honest doing to get stuck in a body.

How would you let them see this? Processing. Almost any processing leads in this direction today.

Well, the process which an individual uses to get stuck in a body is to get all mixed up with control with energy. You know, let's start energy by pushing and pulling energy; let's get everything stopped or changed by changing its mass. In other words, it's almost a complete desertion of the use of a postulate in handling energy. In other words, that is control: handling start, stop, change with energy.

An individual who has had all of his truth perverted has nothing left.

When an individual starts doing this — he starts making his legs move by himself mocking up a moving beam of energy — he's the most remarkable-looking puppet you ever saw in your life. He's all strung up with wires and crossbars, all kinds of clanky systems. All he has to do is say, "The body will now walk," and it'll walk. But instead of that, he gets all these systems rigged up so that he can start, stop and change this body. Well now, that's one of the primary reasons he gets stuck in one: He starts changing everything so he persists in every position he occupies. Drrrr! He walks down the street. How many — assuming that positions are one foot apart, how many positions does he pass through in walking one block? Three hundred. If he's moving the body down the street, see, with energy, he's now stuck in three hundred places. Each position is persisting. Fantastic. How can anybody get in this much trouble? Well, maybe they think it's fun. All right.

Because the only actuality there is, must begin with a certain amount of truth. And then for the actuality to persist, it must be altered. And when we alter the alteration, and then alter that alteration, we begin to walk through a cobweb of lies which is liable to trap anyone — and has even trapped some of the best thinking minds of the last several thousand years. If you don't believe this, read some of the books of the philosophers. Read Plato's dissertation on man. If you've ever read a mad-dog piece of writing, that's one. He had departed far enough from the truth, even Plato, so that he had conceived that man himself was a pretty evil rat.

Now let's go down one step lower and let him conceive of responsibility. That he is responsible for an action, which he means "to blame for an action," which infers there is something wrong with the action which has occurred. We get an action and he says, "Oh," he says, "I'm responsible for that." There must have been something wrong with this action, you see. He is the person who has been selected out as the cause of all the wrongness of the action, and that's what we really mean by that level of responsibility.

Now, processing today depends less upon the alteration of the moral nature of the individual than upon the rehabilitation in the individual of his ability to recognize and to be truth.

By the way, did you ever know any people like this: All the wrong actions that occurred in their vicinity, you did; and all the right actions, they did. Well, a person begins to assume that he is responsible across the boards for all of the wrong actions, and that sticks him.

Well, what is truth?

Then he thinks that he owns it. He owns the body or he owns this or he owns that or he owns somebody else's postulates — they're his — and he gets his ownership mixed up and we practically have finished him right there at that point. He's really stuck. Now he's stuck. And unless he undoes some of this remarkable mental gymnastic and changes his mind about it slightly, he'll go right on being stuck, stupid, a machine. And he will be liable to all of the things to which a machine is liable. He'll be liable to illness, to destruction, to misplaced nuts and bolts and lack of oiling. He will have to seek out the medicos, the electric-shock machines, if anything happens to him. He reminds you of the Tin Woodman from Oz, going around trying to find an oilcan. He behaves like this, and he also behaves without moral value or consideration for his fellows, or good communication with them — which is about all you need to say about his conduct.

If you want to know what truth is for this universe, it's the definition of a static, and, I am afraid, a fairly close path of the fifty-one Axioms in The Creation of Human Ability. They work, because they bring an individual closer to truth and much further away from disaster and lies than anything else has brought him. So there must be an interweave of truth in these Axioms, because in their use, one recovers truth.

Now, this Tone Scale then, just to give it a rapid pass, has come from the narrow band which was occupied . . . Well, first and foremost there was that theoretical scale in Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health. And then there was the small band as expanded in Science of Survival about this Body

What is the basic truth?

Death to Enthusiasm and the emotional scale. Now that Tone Scale, covered in Science of Survival, was all that we used in Dianetics.

The basic truth is that an individual can survive without any communication with his fellows. He can. He can persist one way or the other by his own postulates. He can. And he won't have any games — not a one. He won't have any fun — none. But maybe that's all right, too. And that every individual has within himself free choice to go where he wills, do what he would, think what he wants.

But now today we are using a very wide Tone Scale which goes from minus zero clear on up to Serenity. And with good auditing and a good understanding of the subject, we apparently have the majority of the buttons on it and can use them beneficially. The key buttons that were missing, and their proper position, were Ownership, Responsibility and Control, and they belonged on the minus zero scale.

It's by the interruption of that free choice by himself and by his agreements that we get solidifies, barriers. And these barriers only become onerous and very bad to have around when the individual has more barriers than he has truth.

Along with these came a whole bunch of processes — interesting processes. Consequence Processing: "What would happen if you hid? What would happen if you didn't hide? What would happen if you owned something? What would happen if you controlled something?" Just ask that over and over of a preclear.

And therefore we say to the preclear who can't exteriorize well that we've got to give him some more processing. Why? We've got to change his level of truth, which is to say, we've got to give less stress to these barriers and more stress to the individual. Therefore, when we process a chronic somatic, when we process a body, when we process space, energy and mass, we're changing barriers, and they only persist by being changed. Which leaves us one whole sphere to process, which is much more important than the sphere of barriers, and that whole sphere is the processing of truth itself, which — in you and which is you, a thetan.

Give you an example of this type of processing — another slight type of process — not "what would happen," but "how would you?" Asking the modus operandi: "How would you go about controlling somebody else?" I asked this of a medico who was a good friend of mine. I asked this of him, and we worked for an hour and a half and we just beat this question to pieces. I just asked him this over and over: "How would you go about controlling somebody?" And this fellow told me: drugs, poison, anesthetics, drugs, hypnotism, voodoo, distant control of his mental faculties, drugs, surgery (yeah, surgery was pretty good), poison, anesthetics, voodoo, hypnotism. He never came off of it. The process was too high for the preclear. He never flattened the comm lag on it. I had to undercut it and go down to: "How would you hide something?" And this (snap) — he was right there. Hide — he could get that; people hid things from him all the time.

And a thetan, thereby and therefore, can be processed infinitely without bringing about a persistence of bad conditions. He can be processed without any liabilities. His problems can be addressed and changed without liability, and the only liability there could possibly be in auditing would be to address barriers, because we would make barriers persist. So therefore, we no longer process barriers of any kind. All we do, perhaps, is to get the individual habituated to the idea that there might possibly be some barriers somewhere, and that he could recognize this fact without dying. And when we've done that, we can go on and process the individual.

Having the Tone Scale, we could predict where the individual would have a reality. And so we again use the reality factor. Always process the preclear at the preclear's level of reality and advance upward from that point. You have to find his level of reality in order to process him. The Tone Scale tells you that you will find his level of reality one point below his level of confusion. Now, isn't that cute?

Therefore, we are not in the healing sciences — because there is absolutely nothing wrong of any kind whatsoever with that which we treat, which is the thetan, the spirit of man.

So if you find what he is doing obsessively and unknowingly, obviously and stuckedly, just drop a point and he can process at that point. In other words, this medico was controlling — he was obsessively, continually control, control, control — with these very things he told me were the methods of control. But there was no cognition, there was no thought connected with it at all. He was just going through an endless drill. These things weren't real to him. He'd put somebody on the operating table and cut his throat and it wasn't real, the blood wasn't real, nothing was real. That wasn't his level of reality. So I said, "Well, this is pretty tough, so I'm not going to drop just one level, I'm going to drop three." Dropped four, and he got it. There was his level of reality.

Thank you.

The Tone Scale is basically composed of affinity, communication and reality. The factors of reality and communication are today very, very well understood. There is more that could be understood about affinity, but I'm not rushing things.

Now, the Six Basic Processes and the use of this scale are knocking people out of their heads. In other words, exteriorizing them, giving them greater freedom.

What exteriorization is . . . By the way, that's one of the best little auditing tricks you ever ran into: You just ask a person for hours, "Well, what is exteriorization?" If he's not completely batty, why, after you've asked him this a lot of times, for hours, and gotten his answers and given him acknowledgment and so forth on the thing, he'll tell you, "I'm back of my head." Interesting.

If you even go at him accusatively and you say, "What are you doing in that body?"

And he says, "I don't know that I'm in a body."

"Yeah, I know, but what are you doing in that body?"

And he says, "Well, I don't know that I'm in a body. What do you mean? I'm a body."

You say, "Well okay, what are you doing in the body?" And you just talk to him like this — just question, question, question. "What are you doing in that body?" That's much rougher.

It's much easier to sit there and ask him, "What is exteriorization? All right, that's good. Fine. Thank you. What is exteriorization? Now, what is exteriorization?"

And the fellow's back here saying, "Well, exteriorization is some silly thetan that's gotten into a head and thinks he can control it by operating wires or something, and — that's interiorization. And exteriorization is not doing that, like I'm doing now: I'm back here, back of the body, and ..."

So we've got exteriorization pretty well licked. And we also know where this affinity, reality, communication triangle stacks. We know that we have to process the preclear at his reality. And we know that communication is the solvent for anything. And we know that affinity is a lot of fun.

Thank you.