We are now going to take up this instrument known as the Chart of Human Evaluation and Dianetic Processing. First we will cover, as much as possible, human evaluation and its relationship to processing, and later we will take up processing as such and, in particular, a new method of processing.

I want to tell you about ways and means of spotting people on the tone scale. Actually, it is so easy that it is hard to talk about.

The chart has been designed to overcome certain objections simply by running the scale up from O to 100 and then running it from 100 to 1000, leaving a sufficient margin in there to expand above 4.0. There have been a lot of criticisms of the fact that a finite limit was set on the tone scale, and that “4.0 is an absolute,” and so on. So I took the absolute quantity of it off, because actually there is considerable evidence kicking around that there is quite a bit of material above 4.0. It very well may be that most of it is above 4.0.

For instance, if somebody comes in and sits down and says “Well, I have been sick most of my life. As a matter of fact, I am pretty sick now. People always said I wouldn’t be well, and I guess I never have been,” you start looking over this person and you don’t have to question him too much to spot him on the scale. Here are hypochondria and glandular disturbances.

It now states on the chart in column C, “Capabilities only partly explored” for the free-Theta range of 100 to 900, and up at 1000 it says, “Ultimate capabilities unknown.” This seems to invite the idea that one of these days we may get to a point where we know what these capabilities are. Then we will extend the chart to 2000.

You start looking over people at various levels of the tone scale and you will pick up a tremendous amount of experience. As a matter of fact, when you start getting up along the line you really sharpen up your powers of observation on this. For instance, if a girl walks into the office who is maybe twenty-three or twenty-four, you look at her ankles — not for any aesthetic bang you might get out of it, but because it will tell you something about her endocrine system. Fat accumulates in back of the ankle when the estrogen level is down, even in young girls. If a girl walks in and her pelvic area is not developed you know she is below 2.0.

Now, the reason for this chart is the fact that something had to be done about spotting people so that the proper process could be used on them in order to bring the number of errors down. That was the original reason, and it developed from there into its own useful sphere of human evaluation.

You look at somebody who is physiologically retarded by reason of glandular malfunction; the body is trying to kill itself. That person is definitely physiologically 2.0 or below. As you follow out this case a little bit further you will find other traces of this. The case might prove to be, on questioning, a little bit higher than you thought it was, but sometimes it’s a little bit lower than you thought it was, too. You can spot people pretty well just by looking at them. For instance, there is really no trick in spotting the majority of male 1.5s who are really chronic 1.5s. You go around and look at them; you will see them. You can also follow right up and say what is wrong with them; they have arthritis, or they have something else that is a depository illness — kidney stones and so forth.

The way you read this chart is just as it says. You really don’t have to have a great deal of technical background. You don’t have to worry about “What is the Theta which is going to be on the case?” or how much entheta or. anything of the sort. You just start asking a person questions and he will spot himself on the chart for you, just like that. You don’t have to worry about whether you are addressing the analytical side of his reasoning or the other factors. All you are interested in is getting somebody with enough response to tell you where they sit. Of course, if they don’t respond and they won’t answer your questions and so forth, you can spot them on the chart rather easily too.

If you were a salesman you would have to develop this to a tremendous degree, because one glance would have to tell you exactly where this person is on the tone scale, and then you would sell him the product accordingly. This is like shooting ducks; it is really awful, the ease with which you can get agreement by following out this tone scale. I mean, it makes you feel like a thief or something!

There is really nothing much to it until an auditor starts going into it and asking whys and wherefores. You are supposed to be experts, so you had better know the background music to this chart. If you know the background music, then you will be able to use it and handle it very adequately. Actually, if you know it well enough, you can simply extrapolate the whole chart — just do it in your head. You don’t need this chart after you get used to the reasons why and wherefore.

You walk up to a 1.5, and you want to sell him the idea of something or other, so you talk about it in terms of death and destruction — more or less that line — and the first thing you know, this guy is in agreement with you and you are pals right away.

Of course, this chart has another “use”: Domination by nullification can always use a weapon or two, and as a matter of fact you can certainly take the wind out of almost any preclear’s sails merely by showing him where he is on the tone scale. If you care to do this, though, stand by to process your preclear immediately because you will probably spin him.

Or take a 1.1; you look at this 1.1 and you are looking at the covert level. There is where you get glandular upsets, bad ones. If you try to sell this 1.1 on big, broad, constructive projects, he is just going to sit there and look at you. What you want to do is say, “Well, confidentially, Myers Incorporated uses poison in their beverages and we don’t.”

That is the first thing somebody does with this chart; he looks himself up on it, and then he says, “My God, it can’t be that bad!” So he promptly goes around asking people to say it isn’t that bad, and people very foolishly believe that he is trying to find confirmation, so they agree with him. “Yes, I always knew you were a 0.5. Didn’t you know it?” That is bad manners.

The fellow will go right into agreement with you. This is the level of gossip along a malicious angle — old wives’ tales and that sort of thing. This person will buy this pretty regularly. If you want to sell him an idea or something, it has to be sold on that band.

The way it affects a preclear is actually to send him into a very steep decline. The preclear will ask you and ask you and badger you sometimes, and what he is asking you to do is to say nousually, but actually he will keep it up until you say yes, and then he will spin. So don’t ever be led into that trap. Just point out that nobody is supposed to confirm or negate somebody else’s evaluation on himself, or where it says in the book that the auditor should not be inveigled into disclosing where he thinks the preclear lies on the chart. If you do that, you will have very little trouble.

If you were selling something to someone in apathy, you would go in on the level of “I know it’s all very hopeless anyway. Of course, probably nobody will ever buy this from you, but I’d like to leave you a case or two, just in case somebody does.”If you were really trying to sell people something at their tone scale levels and somebody were watching you, he would swear you were trying to depress people’s tone and all sorts of things. But actually, they come alert and they get very much on the qui vive. They get more volume of what they are, because here you are, another Theta entity. You get a cross-resonance going with a 1.1, for instance, and he can really get to be a 1.1 now. His life force, in other words, exists at his chronic level on the tone scale. If you want the most of him to vibrate, and you want the most of him to be there, and you want to talk to the most of him with the greatest amount of attention from him and the greatest amount of what you would call ARC, you have to talk to him at his level on the tone scale. It is pretty hard to figure how you get affinity below 2.0, but it is an actual fact, you get a sympathetic vibration.

Now, there is something insidious about this chart, in that if you find a person on a low line on three, four or five columns in the Human Evaluation section, the chances are you will find him actually in the same area on the rest of the columns. In talking to him you might not spot some of those other columns, but he will lie in that band.

So don’t ever try to take a 1.1 and sell him the great roseate dream of becoming wonderful and superhuman and growing gilt wings and so on; he won’t buy it. If you are going to sell him the reasons he should get processing, they have to be 1.1 reasons: “You could get a lot smarter. You could trick a lot more people; you could fool them. You could get, with this processing, up to a point where you could really get a guy to cut his throat and he would never know what did it.” The 1.1 will say, “Yeah? Okay, let’s do it.” That is the horrible truth.

I am talking, now, about interpersonal relations and human conduct, and it is a pretty horrible picture.

Or take an apathy case; don’t ever try to sell an apathy case at even half a tone higher than apathy: “It’s no use anyhow. It’s all given up anyway. There isn’t much hope for it. Sometimes preclears die when they are being processed, but we might as well try anyhow.” And the apathy case will say, “Well, go ahead and process me.”

If you find somebody down in the range of depository illnesses, such as arthritis — 1.0 to 2.0 — you know that this fellow gets mad quite a bit, and sometimes you kind of suspect his data. You know that he has a bit of an anesthesia to present time pain. If you just know those things, you can go across the rest of the list arid you will find out what he is doing or what he is capable of doing. And it is true, he is capable of doing that. We have checked quite a few people on this chart.

This is not poetry. You start practicing with this tone scale just by talking to people — preferably people who are way out of Dianetics — and run a two-minute psychometry on them, or a two- minute Dianometry or whatever you want to call it.

We have in this society what is known as a social veneer. Social veneer is an interesting manifestation. It is what the society demands of the individual. But the social veneer, quite ordinarily, is not sufficient to really damp out the actual behavior level of the individual. That, one would say, would be the social education to which a person has been subjected all through the years, such as the shut-up-you-little-brat system of “education.”

Now, a lot of this has to do with voice tone. Voice intonation will carry your message even better than sentiments or words — the mood. But a two minute Dianometry would merely require that you start up at the top of the tone scale and with each succeeding remark come down the tone scale until you get a response — and that is the level the person is at. So you start in talking about this great big, wonderful, beautiful world and how terrific it is and so on; then you say, “But of course, a few precautions would have to be taken in order to carry this forward.” If at this point he says “Yes, that’s true, a few precautions would have to be taken,” you have yourself a 3.0.

We are living in a social order today which says that the proper way to enforce social conduct is to knock it into people. That is the accepted philosophy; that is the punishment-drive theory. That is a MEST theory. A society which runs along on that level is pretty low on the tone scale. It has certainly got more MEST in it than Theta.

If you get no response, you say, “Actually, there isn’t much use in going to all that work, is there?” If he says no, you have a 2.5.

If a person steals, the thing to do is punish him. Now, we don’t take a club to people these days; what we do is take away space and time from them — send them to prison. We take some MEST away from them. We deprive them, in other words, of some of their control of MEST. Naturally, if you do this to an individual he goes down the tone scale.

Next, you say, “There are a lot of people around that wouldn’t want you to do this, but . . .” He says, “There are, too!” You have a 2.0.

The society is most satisfied when they have a criminal in apathy, but a criminal in apathy is a pretty dangerous character to have around. You are better off to have a criminal in anger than in apathy, because when he starts to blow in the apathy line, he really blows. In the anger line, he might take it out in an occasional dramatization.

Or you drop down again and say, “You know, a guy that would do a thing like that, though, ought to be killed.” If he agrees, you have a 1.5.

But where it comes to a punishment-drive society, the social veneer is a pretty forced proposition. People really get knocked around. Consequently, your preclears can be expected to have been thoroughly educated into the fact that they have to be social, they have to be agreeable, they have to be this and they have to be that. This runs straight through anybody you are going to process. You could actually pick the social education off a case and you would find him coming up the tone scale. But you would find something else happening a little bit: you would uninhibit him a trifle. It is not true that you would unbalance him to a point where he would suddenly start doing antisocial things. You are just picking up some of the suppression off him.

If you still haven’t got a response, you say, “Of course, a fellow would have to go into this sort of slyly; I mean, he wouldn’t dare let on really what he was doing.”

But he is giving a present time manifestation which has social veneer as its manifestation. For instance, if somebody gives you something, you say “Thank you.” The reason you say “Thank you” is not because you appreciate it, but because you get your head knocked off when you are a child if you don’t say “Thank you.” It is a very simple equation: Not saying “Thank you” equals being slapped.

“Yeah, he wouldn’t.” You have got yourself a 1.1.

So you have an engram line of action there; it is reactive. Social conduct is to a large degree reactive. It is not a training pattern, it is a habit pattern (differentiating between habit patterns and training patterns), meaning that a habit pattern is something which is beaten into a person or enforced upon him or comes from reactive commands, and a training pattern is something that is educated into the individual.

Or you drop down again, saying, “Well, it’s kind of hopeless doing anything about it, but you might try — not that there’s any future in it.”

So you take a look at the surface manifestation of the individual and you will find there a great deal of social education. This chart penetrates straight through this social education, because it compartments the things on which a person’s conduct really hinges.

“No, there really isn’t any future in life, either, is there?” and you have a 0.5.

What do you want to know about human beings? Ethic level, how they handle truth, their courage level, ability to handle responsibility. You want to know, if she says “I love you,” whether or not she does. There are a lot of interesting things you would like to know about human beings. If you go through the thank-you veneer of social conduct and reach down to this other level — ethics, truth and the rest of these things that really amount to something — you will find that the little tabs which spot people on these columns are sticking out all over the place. They really stick out.

There is the way you can run the gamut. But you can just listen to people as they talk to you and find out what they spontaneously talk about, and there you have a tone scale level. What they spontaneously talk about and resonate to most rapidly and readily is where they are.

Now, when you start in with a preclear you are liable to make the error of taking his social educational level. For instance, a lady walks in and sits down; her clothes are very nice, she is nicely kept, she carries her pocketbook neatly, she crosses her legs modestly when she sits down, the makeup on her face is on straight and it is the very best makeup, she says “Please” and “Thank you” — in other words, she is a complete social automaton. You talk to this lady and obviously you are dealing with a “civilized” human being.

However, if you happen to be way up the tone scale around 2.5 or 3.0 and you are laying a tremendous volume into this fellow, you are liable to bring him up the tone scale to where you are. You aren’t finding out where he is; you are making an acute 2.5 or a 3.0 or a 3.5 out of him because you make him start to resonate where you are.

How do you know? The truth of the matter is that you don’t — not until you begin to find out a few things concerning this person’s agreement, where she lies on the speech column, what her attitude is toward children, and so on, right along the chart level. The first thing you know, you will find somebody who is actually, perhaps (let’s be unoptimistic about it), terrifically promiscuous, sadistic and who probably will, one of these fine days, cave in somebody’s life for him and knock apart the environment in general and in particular. This is not a civilized human being. This is punishment-drive veneer which is carrying this person forward.

That is actually what a good auditor does who is riding around 2.5 or 3.0. He gets this fellow resonating up where he is. He does not want to process a guy down at 1.1 if he can process him riding at 3.0. If every session this person has the hopefulness — if a little bit moderated by conservatism — that he is really going to get well and so forth, he will not behave during that session like a 1.1, he will behave like a 3.0.

As auditors, you are not interested in social veneer. What you are interested in is how you process this person and approximately what you have to look for in this person. That is what you are interested in.

So in spotting someone on the tone scale you have to talk to them briefly, because you can talk to a 3.0 on a 1.5 basis for three or four minutes and put them into a 1.5. In other words, the variable tone can be changed, and when it comes to processing, what you are interested in is chronic tone.

You could take this girl and say, “She is a civilized human being. Therefore she probably lies around 2.5 or 3.0. She responds perfectly well. I asked her to run out a cut finger and she said that she could feel the pain. She moves on the time track. The thing to do is to find basic-basic and process the case.” You go to basic-basic and she runs halfway through an engram and sticks right in the middle of the engram and she can’t come to present time. So you decide to run another engram and she really can’t come to present time now. So you decide to get an earlier engram and you run that, and that has a grouper in it and her track collapses. Then you say to her, “Come up to present time,” and that brings all the somatics to present time. And then you say, “I can’t do very much for you,” and she walks away. She is a wreck! She was a wreck before she walked in there, of course, but you have just accentuated the condition.

Now, there are many ways of looking at this. I’m going to tell you how this breaks down.

The point is that this case will tell you one thing and run another. If this case has had any slightest instruction on how to be audited, it can put on a beautiful show of being audited and never be audited at all — never leave present time. Its truth level and everything else is just all shot to the devil. The horrible fact is that this case would rather tell you something phony than tell you something true. It isn’t a matter of whether or not this person is afraid of your finding out something; it is just mechanically a fact that this person will lie in preference to telling the truth. So when you ask this person to run out an engram that has to do with when her finger was cut, she will go back to a time when she was driving a car. You say, “Are you there now, with that cut finger?”

The thing the auditor is interested in primarily is the Theta/entheta ratio — in other words, the mechanical aspect of Theta and entheta on the case. How much of this case is “permanently” enturbulated and how much is variable on the tone scale? Reading off these columns and asking the proper questions will give you some sort of an approximation of that.

And she’ll say, “Oh yes” — driving merrily down the road in the car. “Now, where does it hurt?”

The ratio itself on this chart is subject to better understanding and further adjustment. But you are interested in that fixed ratio. You are not interested in the fact that this person occasionally is capable of great constructive actions, nor are you interested in other variable manifestations. What you are interested in is the entheta manifestation, but you should not make the mistake of believing that you are measuring the reactive mind solely and that this person’s behavior is going to be something else, because he has Theta to work with too.

“Oh yes, I can feel the pain” — driving down the road in the car — and by this time she has sort of drifted off; she has gotten bored with the whole thing and she is looking at a butterfly or something. It is fantastic!

You are going to find that the case, just as you look at it, as you test it, as you talk to it and so on, is going to lie along a certain band on the tone scale. You don’t have to know how to subdivide the case, in other words, to read it off on the tone scale. But the point is that the only Theta on a case exists preferably way up above 2.0, and it rocks around in the upper band of the tone scale from 2.0 up. That is what Theta there is, unless a tremendous volume of restimulation hits the individual, and then all the free Theta on the case will resonate at the level of the entheta on the case. And if it resonates there harshly and solidly and for a long time, you have a case that is spun in; in other words, there is no free Theta left on this case to rock around on the tone scale. Then you have a permanent reactive-mind manifestation, and there you have what is really considered to be a psychotic. That is the psychotic break — when all of the free Theta that was able to reason and move around on the tone scale suddenly resonates and then stays permanently fixed at the chronic level of the case. Nothing is free about this case; it is static, permanent. Of course, it is up to you, then, to free enough Theta to get it back up along the line again. These sudden entrapments are generally done by fear or grief secondaries. Sudden big fear or grief secondaries are what will spin somebody in ordinarily. People say, “He had a shock and he went crazy.” It just spins in what free Theta there was.

After you have “processed” this person for a little while, you suddenly decide that this case isn’t getting well somehow. It isn’t getting along; there is something wrong here. This is not dub-in like you have known it, but you keep on valiantly trying to do something for this person. And then one day she is bored with being audited. She is tired of lying on the couch really doing nothing and telling you that she is doing something, so she suddenly shows up as an inaccessible case and says, “I really don’t like to be audited; I hate it. I’m just doing it to oblige you.”

But don’t think that, because a person has free Theta that can move around on his case, he won’t manifest on a chronic level, because he will. If the fellow just has one engram, the tone level of the reactive mind is below 2.0, because there is where the reactive mind cuts in — all the way down from 2.0. That is the band of the reactive mind.

This case will also make weird cracks at you sometimes about “I never seem to be able to get any grief off my auditor.” If this person is at 0.5, the actual truth of what this person is trying to do is make the auditor feel bad. This case isn’t trying to get better; this case is trying to make somebody else feel bad. She never gets any grief off her auditor, so she doesn’t consider that her auditing is successful. She is not able to depress or kill anybody.

The analytical mind is from 2.0 up. That is the analytical band. Theta is functioning almost always in the analytical level. But this sort of a situation can happen: A dramatization occurs and the free Theta is made to resonate temporarily at that dramatization level. A person starts dramatizing 1.5, and this free Theta momentarily enturbulates; it is temporary entheta.

There is something else very funny about this case: If the case is at 0.5, the promiscuity which this case can achieve is even higher than that of a 1.1. The chart says in column P that the 1.1 is promiscuous; it should have a little notation for the 0.5 that says “much more promiscuous,” because the 0.5, flatly, does not give a doggone about any type of conduct — ethical, sexual or any other kind.

Now, the way a life course goes along is that with an engram you have a potential trap for free Theta, so the free Theta enturbulates, some of it gets trapped in the engram and it doesn’t get free again. Only the larger percentage of the free Theta gets free. Then there is another key-in and another lock and a little more Theta gets enturbulated; it is all enturbulated at that point, and then some of it goes free. This is the cycle of locks and secondaries.

You will read, in texts of ancient cults which have been taken out of the ruins of the New York American Psychiatric Association, notations to the effect that immediately after a death in the family people become sexually promiscuous, or something of the sort. This is really true! You take some widow who is crying in her beer or somebody who has just lost somebody, and there is a setup. But it is this kind of a setup: It has beautiful drapes hung around it and a beautifully festooned arbor — with a land mine sitting in the center of it! This case has really one ambition: this case is trying to die, but it would be a little more successful if it could make you die, too!

So first there is the engram; it isn’t hurting very much. It doesn’t have very much free Theta in it to begin with. It has not enturbulated much free Theta. The initial engram doesn’t trap very much, but it goes into a dramatization and it is sort of like something that has hooks on it. The next time this fellow hits the tone level of that engram a little bit of his free Theta gets trapped in it and he has a lock. This happens again and again, and each time he gets another lock. This engram finally gets big and fat and sassy because it has the preponderance of free Theta on the case with this engram chain, or the reactive mind as a whole.

So, as an auditor, the wrong way to open up the accessibility of this case would be to sleep with it. I merely put that in as a gentle caution, not because anything like that happens in Dianetics, but because it was so prevalent in psychiatry before psychiatry collapsed.

The reactive mind, then, fattens in the absence of processing at the expense of the free Theta. As the reactive mind comes on, there is less energy that plays in the analytical mind; you can look at it that way.

As a matter of fact, I speak with complete authority on the matter. I would never say anything about psychiatry without authoritative references. There is a book by Dr. Frieda Fromm- Reichmann, Principles of Intensive Psychotherapy. You ought to read that book someday; it beats a comic book. It says the psychiatrist should be very, very wary indeed of taking out all of his satisfaction on his patients. It says you shouldn’t do that all the time. It also says psychiatrists should stay awake and that the practice of sleeping around the patient while the patient is talking is not as prevalent in modern schools as it was a few years ago, and it is gradually dying out.

Now we can go back to our good old analogy of just analytical and reactive levels of thought, and we don’t have to worry about Theta and MEST or anything else, and it is obvious that the more the reactive mind has poured into it — the more reactive moments there are in a person’s life — the fatter the reactive mind gets and the more the analyzer shuts down. The person begins with almost 100 percent analytical and practically no reactive, and finally winds up with practically 100 percent reactive and practically no analytical — in other words, a “normal.” There is the cycle.

You are actually living in a different atmosphere entirely than psychotherapy had. There is a different climate in Dianetics, and you really ought to look it over and find out what kind of a climate psychotherapy had, as an archaeological fact.

That is one manifestation, then, that you get on the tone scale, and that is the one the auditor is interested in — the mechanical aspect of the Theta/entheta ratio. That is very important to you because you are trying to get the entheta converted back into Theta again. That is what processing is all about. That is important to you and that gives you the manifestation of the individual. The most confirmed opinions of this individual will be along his chronic level. The things which he has cared to absorb are along that band. The things which he can remember best are at his chronic level. What he will call pleasure is at his chronic level.

Now, the reason psychotherapy could fall into these booby traps was that it did not have its goal well aligned. This is, bluntly, true. Its goal was never defined, actually. You look in vain; you won’t find a precisely defined goal for psychotherapy. You will find, stated in texts on psychopathology and around in the field occasionally, that what they are trying to do is adjust an individual to his environment, but you will not find much of an amplification of that. And that, of course, you recognize to be a very dangerous thing to do. To adjust a man well to his environment is dangerous, because there is nothing quite so changing as this environment.

You will occasionally find a person who has been way up for a long time and then really gets punched around for a while — he has to associate with a communist or something — and his case will go way off. His tone level will go way down and become chronic below 2.0 and not escape again. A series of shocks will do this. Let’s say his education is on a highly constructive level; this person will still try to function on that educational level, but he hasn’t got Theta enough to do it and he has a bad time. The manifestations he has will change and become those of his new chronic level. But the data he has to operate on is 3.0 data — he doesn’t have much of this other data — and he has a hard time making an adjustment. You will see occasionally where this has happened.

One of these days — next week, next month, next year, five years from now or twenty years from now — somebody is going to dump a cargo of atom bombs on America, and we won’t have soda pop and so forth and the environment is going to shift to some slight degree. If the environment were to suddenly shift, and if everyone were well adjusted to this environment of jukeboxes and all the rest of it, and none of us were able to make a campfire or boil beans or make a rabbit trap or something of the sort — if there weren’t some people still holding on to techniques which adjusted them to other environments elsewhere and we did not have the adaptability of adjusting to this brand-new environment — we would really be dead ducks. So adjusting to the environment is non survival. Therefore it is not a good goal.

There are individuals who have been raised in a society and have been given a lot of locks and pounded around, let us say, at 1.1; that is all the educational level they have. When you bring this person up the tone scale you will find he has no data; he is out of the data band.

Now, if adjusting to the environment is non survival, that would postulate that doing so would send people down the tone scale; this is exactly what those psychotherapies accomplished. It is a very funny thing, but the modus operandi of the electric shock, the prefrontal lobotomy, insulin shock — all of these things — depresses a person on the tone scale or cuts out his endowment to some slight degree. We find that this is a dangerous thing to do!

Take any person who has been to a university and raise him up the tone scale to 1.5: that person is then a fish out of water; he doesn’t know what to do. So you have an educational aspect that comes in there.

If a psychotherapy continues along in that line, it will eventually place in a country a preponderance of insane. It might be that the number of insane in the country could get up to 19 millions; it just might. As a matter of fact it has. That goal, then, sends people down the tone scale. But that goal has not been evaluated.

Now, the first manifestation is just mechanical — the ratio between Theta and entheta. The second way tone can vary is with the current situation. What is the person’s present time like? Look over his present time. You will find the present time has a tone.

There really are practitioners in that field who are trying to help people — who try earnestly, honestly to help people. That they haven’t got the tools is another question, but some of the things they use are quite beneficial. There are a lot of odds and ends. If somebody comes in and he just has somebody to talk to — he doesn’t have another friend in the whole world and the psychoanalyst is very friendly to him — then he has ARC and he will come up the tone scale. That is beneficial.

By the way, as you ask him across the boards about general reactions to life you will find his chronic tone level, not his present time tone level. But if you ask him what he is going to do about some situation in present time he will give you the tone-level response of the present time tone level. If it is a pretty bad present time, if the tone level of the present time is down around 0.5 or something like that, you ask him if he is going to write a letter about something and he will say, “No.”

Furthermore, he has been told that the person can help him, so when he goes to this person who is supposed to be able to help him he assumes that he is helped.

“Are you going to read your mail?” “No.”

Quite in addition to that, there are numbers of people in the field of psychiatry and psychoanalysis who are very far from hewing to the line. They are using anything that comes into their heads in order to make these people better and happier. These people are inventive, they are working hard, they are in a highly aberrative environment and so on, and they are trying their level best to do something. They are sort of picking it out of a hat to do it, too, and the reason they have to pick it out of the hat is that there is not even an established line in psychotherapy or psychoanalysis. Every third practitioner you meet is following somebody else and these all conflict with each other, and it is a very confused picture.

Try and get him to talk to you. He won’t, although he could quite ordinarily be well up the tone scale. But here you have a present time which is just momentarily hanging at that level.

What you are trying to do, then, is defined. You have a goal; there is a specific goal in your processing. It is not a maybe or an I-guess goal. You achieve this goal or your preclear isn’t being done much good; that is all. The division is quite sharp: You either shove your preclear up the tone scale and keep him up there and get him stabilized up there, or you are not doing him any good; this is blunt and factual.

So you can get a present time manifestation of tone. And even though that present time extends only for two hours, three hours, four hours, it has in it all the elements of the whole tone band right across the line. For instance, you know that a case has been running ordinarily like a 3.0. You have been having a grand time with this case, and all of a sudden Mama dies or something or other happens. Are you going to keep on trying to process him at his chronic level? No. You would be in trouble right away. You have got to process him at the level he is in. This fellow has had a terrific shock, he is in grief, tears are leaking out of his eyes and he obviously is at 0.5, so do you say, “All we need to do is just run out the grief engram”? No! You cannot run a secondary at 0.5 — unless it is one of these strange flukes that you occasionally get where a psychotic is actually sitting in the thing and is running it all the time anyhow and you just run it on out. Once in a while you can do that but it is dangerous.

When you get him up the tone scale you will find out that he is easier and easier to work with, he is easier to live with, he is doing a more efficient job for himself, his health is better and so forth.

If this person all of a sudden has a terrific shock and he is at 0.5, but you know that he is a 3.0 and you try to process him as a 3.0, you will hang him up and louse him up and make him worse. What you want to do is hit him at the tone level he is in, not the tone level you knew he was in. That would be tantamount to saying “We know that this person had a very happy childhood and just went along fine to the age of five. Now he is forty-five and he is very sad, but he had a happy childhood so let’s process him at the level of his childhood as a 4.0.” You would really louse him up.

We have had two or three assigned goals. The first one that we started out with was “Get rid of all the engrams on the case.” We still have that as the long-range goal; that hasn’t altered. Just short of that was “Get rid of most of the secondaries and some of the engrams on the case.” That was a release; that is good. And just short of that was “Cheer this fellow up a little bit by running out what he is worrying about or getting the engram that is lying there really giving him trouble,” and that is an assist. But all of those things can be bundled up into the one package of pushing him up the tone scale. You can actually process somebody endlessly without bringing him up the tone scale. I hate to have to tell you that. What happens is that you start out with 20 percent Theta and 80 percent entheta on the case and then you keep investing this 20 percent Theta into this entheta and you keep enturbulating — or the environment keeps enturbulating — enough of the Theta which is coming back out to keep the case static on the tone scale or even depress it on the tone scale. In other words, you are processing just a little more heavily than you should be and maybe a little more authoritarianly than you should be. You might not think you are auditing authoritarianly, but to a preclear who is very low on the tone scale, the snap of the fingers and the demand of a phrase or the request “Who’s talking?” or something like that is enough to enturbulate him. So, you are taking the 20 percent and you are investing it to clear up some of the 80 percent, and sure enough, you get 5 percent of the 80 percent entheta out in a session. But you put 5 percent of the 20 percent Theta back into entheta on the session. At the end of the session, this fellow might not have as many psychosomatic illnesses, but he is no further up the tone scale: this person is still 20 percent Theta and 80 percent entheta.

So the present time situation has something to do with it. As a matter of fact, a lot of people can become acutely psychotic, just momentarily. A fellow who gets angry and busts things up and so forth — even though he does it only for ten minutes — is a psychotic for those ten minutes and you have to handle him as such. Just because the fellow is ordinarily reasonable does not mean that when he is in this 1.5 dramatization he is reasonable then, too.

Now, if the preclear is being processed by a 0.5, I will guarantee that this case will slump to 0.5 just by continuous proximity to 0.5. This is sympathetic vibration. The auditor’s tone is a sympathetic vibration for the preclear so if the auditor is at 2.5 and the preclear is at 1.1, just by talking to the auditor the preclear certainly — just during the session — will tend to come up to 2.5. He will tend to do that, just like that, without any processing. You keep that up, month in and month out, with good ARC coming from the auditor on a 2.5 level, and your preclear will come on up the line.

The third manifestation is with the tone of specific engrams. That is much more important than it would seem at first glance. We all know that engrams can hang anyplace on the tone scale; that is easy. Only it contains some data that I am sure some of you will be very happy to have.

Of course, the preclear is having a little attention paid to him, and if he is kept talking about birds, bees, fish, anything in present time — even if he is permitted to wander up and down and around his life and tell you about how he drowned his grandmother’s kittens and about that big boy who said those nasty sexual words to him and the time when he had this terrible fixation upon his mother, and all of these obsessions (in other words, a standard psychoanalytic session) — he will come up the tone scale for a while. You can bring him up and make him more or less coast along at 2.5.

A person has been living in a 3.0 environment and has been passing along very well in this 3.0 environment — not too bright, maybe, but he has been getting by. When you try to have this case respond well and easily there is something wrong with it, but you can’t quite put your finger on what. This person is riding an engram with a 3.0 tone. The person would have to be a bit out of valence in it because certainly his tone wasn’t 3.0 when he was going through the experience which gave him this engram, but somebody else around him was, or maybe everybody was just too happy and cheerful for words in the hospital, and it gives the engram this phony tone.

What happens then? After he leaves he starts associating with somebody he had picked out earlier as a friend, who is down around the preclear’s 1.1 band, and as soon as he starts associating with this person you get resonance, and what is 1.1 in the preclear starts coming out again. A short time after this has taken place the case slumps.

When you run into that on somebody, every time you ask him how he is doing he says, “Oh, I feel fine, I feel wonderful. Isn’t it a beautiful day! Isn’t it a beautiful day! “ This person obviously is responding to the environment just exactly like he ought to respond, but you know darn well the second you try to go into the case that you are dealing with a psycho. There is a manic! What do you do with people like that? I’m going to tell you right now how to bust a manic: you scan out all the times when they felt good! And you will wind up sitting in the middle of a manic engram.

Here is resonance all by itself.

I discovered the other day that auditors ordinarily didn’t fall into that one easily because it seems too reasonable that the person should feel well. The auditor is also too prone to accept his data — much too prone to accept it. The auditor wants this guy to be at 3.0 and this guy is at 3.0, so the auditor says, “That’s fine, we won’t question it any further. Good, we’ve got him up the tone scale.” And the auditor is dealing with a 0.4!

If you go into a case at 1.5 with a 1.5 attitude and that case is above 1.5, you will bring it down to 1.5. You will start to get incidents off the case along the level of 1.5 if the case is above this level. You will start to get data or you will get a present time dramatization that is 1.5.

He starts to run this case like a 3.0 and he is really running a 0.4, and the case starts enturbulating more and more, and then one day this person picks up a gun and shoots the auditor and shoots himself!

If the case is below 1.5 and you attack with a 1.5 attitude the case will drop down, because that is, after all, the ambition of 1.5 — to drive down. You will wind your case up two or three tenths of a point below where it had originally been found.

Don’t let these manics fool you. There are plenty of them walking around in the society. There are always people around who are walking around in a manic. And don’t think that manic is “maniac.” In Dianetics it just means somebody that is apparently up the tone scale who is not. That is a simple definition.

Tone 1.5 is of course authoritarianism. Here you have the electric shock, the prefrontal lobotomy and the rest of those things. The case will be more tractable; the person can be put into a state where, when you put his hand up, he will leave his hand up — in other words, he will be completely tractable. That case is not well, though. The only way he can get well, and the only way this case can be safe or the social order can be safe around this case is for someone to push him up the tone scale.

The point is that by checking the person thoroughly you discover this rapidly; and then you will find, by checking this, what the person is manic about. Don’t think that by breaking this person’s manic you are going to make him feel worse, because you won’t. A person who is walking around in one of these I’ve-got-to-feel-good things feels terrible, actually. They feel bad; they feel hectic, strained. The guy who is “the life of the party” goes to the party, he is the life of the party all the way through and at the end of the party he is a rag. He is a nervous wreck and he hasn’t had a good time. But everybody says, “You sure were the life of the party!” and key it in again on him. So, semantic content can contain any kind of conduct.

Now, what ordinarily happens in a highly forceful and dramatic society during its pioneer days is that people come in to a new environment. They are very much extroverted because of the dangers in that environment. They act constructively, creatively and destructively in order to fix up this environment so they can take it over. They pick up certain habits and customs along the way that have to do with a lot of action. That impulse toward action continues; engrams start to be laid into the coming generations. The first thing you know, it isn’t a pioneer society anymore, it is a cream-puff society. It is a 1951 society, or something of the sort, and all of this tremendous action and its background is now coasting along as aberration. People are depressed down along the line.

I’ll repeat the cure for that again: just find out what this person is too high on and scan through all the times he felt good about that thing.

For instance, you can’t handle this society on the punishment-drive level that a pioneer society was trying to handle people on because they were really handling violent people. These people were right out there rolling; they had left their aberrations behind them. They were in an unrestimulative atmosphere and they had a tremendous goal. In other words, you could put a tremendous amount of punishment up against them without stopping them. Not in this society: hold up your little finger and people stop. It is fashionable to sit down and say “I am idle and I do nothing.” People say, “He is a great guy. He is idle, he is unproductive.”

Let’s say this person is 0.5 pretty much across the boards but, strangely enough, on the subject of sex and children is 4.0. Do you say “The tone scale just erred. Let’s go on and . . .”? No sir! You stop right there and take a look at that second dynamic, because that is one of your first shots. Until you have that one, you won’t get this preclear broken loose enough to where he can run, because “I” is sitting over in the middle of a circuit — some kind of a manic setup. You are going to have a hard time with this case; this case is going to be inaccessible to you. So do something about those wild variables!

When the society gets to the point where it is now, a lot of people are down the tone scale. In other words, you have a lot of 0.5s, a lot of 1.1s, a few 1.5s and so on kicking around in the society. If a third of the population is below 2.0, they are going to have a sort of a resonant effect upon the society.

The way you handle this case is to scan the person through all the times when he felt good on the second dynamic: “Scan through all the times you felt you loved children.... Now scan through all the times when children were nice.... Scan through all the times when you enjoyed children.... Now let’s scan through all the times when you really enjoyed sexual intercourse.” Do this over and over and over, and all of a sudden this person will go anaten. Of course, they will do it for other reasons, but if you are really working on one of those wild variables, the guy will go under that anaten quickly and he will boil and boil and boil. You try to get him out of it, and then all of a sudden whopping big somatics turn on.

For instance, in order to suppress the criminal the police pass rigorous laws. It gets to the point where, one day, somebody steps off the curb and walks across the street just wrong and he gets arrested. This enturbulates him a little bit.

Sometimes the person is sitting over there in present time in the midst of this circuit, and he is really way off the time track and everything else, but there is a phony track under it and there are all sorts of perceptic manifestations that are all loused up. These can be really terrific! You won’t get very far as an auditor if you don’t recognize one of those when you see one, because you will give him too heavy a processing and you will keep him enturbulated, and the next thing you know, you won’t have any preclear And that is unfortunate.

There are enough people around who are “careless” — in other words, who are attempting suicide purposefully, actually — and step out in front of cars and get run over and so on that the cops pass a law and say, “That’s not nice; you mustn’t do that.”

Now, the other manifestation that you find with the tone of specific engrams is the reverse of this. You can have a fellow who has lots of Theta but he is hung up in a low-toned engram. It will go into restimulation and he will go around feeling like the last rose of summer and awfully hangdog and so on; he will go into these depressive states which are quite unlike him. That is just a low-toned engram that kicks in, and you handle that the same way. You just knock out every time he felt like that and you will finally uncover the engram. So it varies with the tone of specific engrams.

All laws that are valid laws are directed toward the goal of inhibiting conduct below 2.0, so they are 2.0 suppressors. They are down the tone scale from 2.0. This is the conduct that the law and social order objects to, up to the point where it itself drops wholly below 2.0, and then everything turns around and these things are very much condoned; these are the things to do.

The fourth tone scale manifestation is according to phrase manifestations. We more or less covered that when I talked about manics. A person can have a line of conduct dictated by the engrams themselves, and you can place him on the tone scale semantically. Having placed him on the tone scale with words, you will find, oddly enough, that his actual behavior does not vary an iota from the first manifestation — mechanically, with the ratio of free Theta to entheta.

That is the law band, from 2.0 down, and laws exist to inhibit this type of conduct. That law has a resonance: it actually validates that this kind of conduct can exist. “It is against the law to rape two-year-old children.” There is such a law. Who would think of this? But the law says so and you hear about it once in a while in the newspapers and so on. So there is a resonance going through the society at that band, and that makes it tough on the society. Because of the non survival activity of people on a low band, more and more suppression is put against the society in order to inhibit such conduct, and the society goes lower and lower on the tone scale.

He will talk and act, for your benefit, at some other level on the tone scale than where he really is, but just by going across these columns and finding what his actual behavior is you will discover what his actual tone level is. In other words, the words don’t change it that much. What has seniority here is the mechanical aspect of the free Theta/entheta ratio. That has seniority over word content.

You as auditors are auditing in a society which is unfortunately far too low on the tone scale, and the people you come in contact with, usually, are way down. They are in low-toned environments. For instance, a fellow you are processing comes to the session and he seems to be in perfectly good order after the session. Then he goes home, and you know this fellow is in pretty good shape, but when he comes to the session next time he is down the tone scale again. So you bring him up the tone scale and you process him for a couple of hours and he is feeling good, but he goes home and he goes down the tone scale again. You can keep this up for a long time.

The tone level of education and general environment is manifestation number five. If you get somebody who all his life has lived in a 1.5 family or society, something like that, and whose education has been along in this band, and clear all the engrams out of his bank, you are not going to have a person who will easily manifest. He is going to have a tough time trying to adjust himself to his own educational level. What do you do about this fellow? Pull his education up and throw it away! There is nothing to that. Most education’s are fixed entheta anyhow.

Fortunately, you as auditors actually can win eventually.

One of the quickest things you can do for the case is to start back on the educational line, pick up the last school he went to and scan it out; pick up the school he went to before that — college — and scan it out. Class by chess, knock it all out. Go back to high school and grammar school and scan it all out. And then you will find Mama and Papa. All of this formal education, in lots of cases, is actually sitting on top of and occluding his early-life training and education, which is the most effective because it came first and had priority and because he was smallest then and he couldn’t fight back. He had to do it.

But this fellow is leaving your environment, wherever it is on the tone scale, and he is going back to a 1.1 environment. Let’s say twenty-two hours of the day are spent in this 1.1 environment and two hours of the day are spent in your environment. Which one is going to win? It is a preponderance of time. Just the proposition of trying to process out the last twenty- two hours since you saw him is enough for you to almost have your hands full. You can keep this up on and on and on, because he is going into a society that is at a lower band than you are.

So if you want to uncover early childhood, that is one of the quickest routes into it I know of. Then he can reevaluate his educational data, according to the reasons which he now has and can see in his society, toward a survival direction. He doesn’t have to believe everything the professors told him. That is important.

Now, estimate the level of interest of this society; take a look at the daily newspaper. Take a look at the most popular ones and you will find out what this society buys. In other words, that newspaper is a resonance in the society; it is a vibration in the society and it keeps the social order about on that level. It tries to. All they are really trying to do is sell papers, so it just brings up with more volume the level in which the society is most interested. That will tell you a great deal.

By the way, there is another trick associated with this. As professional auditors you can always pick up a quick buck just before examinations. This works for any student. All you have to do is scan him through the course he has just had; scan him through the course a few times and then send him in to take the examination. The data is now “live” to him. It hasn’t been reduced; it has been restimulated and a lot of the suppressors — the entheta — have come out of the line, and he has less inhibition about writing it down. That is worth doing.

I went back through the files of the National Intelligencer. The National Intelligencer was being published about the time Washington, D.C., was being built and it came on up until just past 1900 and then ceased to exist, but its files are all on record. You find such interesting things in the National Intelligencer as “Barrel of whiskey, aged 5 years — $5.00.” I got fascinated reading those things, but what I was going through was the tone level of the society — what sold papers when.

There you have those five ways tone varies on the tone scale. I’ll repeat them now:

It was not until after the Civil War that police notices were published in the National Intelligencer, and then they were published in a little tiny box on the last page at the bottom and consisted of just one or two small items. As a little time went on, about 1880, this little tiny item got stepped up to being about half a column, but we still find one-sentence recountings of rather awful crimes: “Last night, Maria Georgianna, the star from the Metropolitan Opera Company of New York City that has been playing in town, was found murdered in her dressing room.” Next item. They put things like that in this little tiny script on the back end of the paper.

1. Mechanically — the ratio between Theta and entheta (that compares also to analytical and reactive)

Now, people are prone to turn around to William Randolph Hearst and say, “This is the dog that really loused us up by introducing yellow journalism.” That is not quite right; the society just started buying yellow journalism and he caught up with the bandwagon. Maybe he was quicker to recognize it than somebody else. He got to a point where, when somebody went down to Cuba to take some war photographs for him and cabled back “There’s no war down here,” Hearst told him, “You send me the photographs and I’ll give you the war,” because people wanted to buy 1.5 right about then.

I don’t know quite what people are buying now, but it sure is way down on the tone scale.

When you are dealing, then, with a present time environment on this band of the tone scale, you recognize that your preclear is going to be resonating along that band of the environment: “War with Russia,” “Korean War,” “Five-Percenters Arrested Yesterday,” “Twenty-one Communist Leaders Indicted,” and so forth — good, valuable data! You are working uphill on this tone scale, then, aren’t you? Not only are you taking a fellow out of a social order which finds that kind of news to be the most digestible news, but you are trying to bring him up above this point from a childhood environment that was way back down, and so on. In other words, you have a job on your hands.

Fortunately we have a technique which resolves quite a bit of this. And fortunately the human being is a pretty resilient item.

But if you don’t pay attention to this tone scale, what is going to happen? You will leave this person fairly static at about the level of the society or the level of his family or the level of the auditor, and there he will sit! Are you going to get a 4.0 out of this? No, you are not.

There is another one, which has less serious- effect than some of the others. Some person who has been restricted physiologically or glandularly from certain types of activity will have been forced to assume a certain level on the tone scale for certain subjects, which will have influenced his conduct at other points of life. This is something that an auditor can square up and should square up rather readily and rapidly. After you have straightened out something like this, or it has been straightened out, go back over the stuff again and lock-scan the data on it. Lock-scan a lot of the data on it, because otherwise the person is liable to keep operating with certain inhibitions which he really doesn’t need to observe now.

Unfortunately, in order to run everything out of the bank and so forth, a person has to be pretty well up on the tone scale. If you could just start out with a 4.0 case, would he audit well! That is an unfortunate thing — you are starting it backwards in Dianetics. The toughest amount of stuff on the case comes and has to be attacked when the case is lowest on the tone scale.

For instance, take a chronic psychosomatic illness: some fellow who has had sinus trouble has busily trained into himself the mechanism whereby he shouldn’t sit in the draft. So he will go around being careful not to sit in the draft. But birth has been erased and the person doesn’t need that mechanism anymore! You will find out that if you just say “Scan through all the training patterns resulting from your nose condition,” or something of the sort, you will clear this up and give him a lot more flexibility in life. Until you do that, the environment has closed him in a little tighter than it should.

We have a little handy, Jim-dandy supersonic vibrator coming up.

What we are talking about mainly is straightening a case up after you have run quite a few engrams off it. That is important.

The Japanese, during the last war, developed quite a bit in supersonics. They wanted some supersonic hand weapons or machine guns or something of the sort that could kill people at several hundred yards. They did develop and explore what was known as the “black band” on the sound wavelength bands, and they invented gimmicks and gadgets that would actually create vibrations along in this level.

A washing-machine company in the United States picked this up and found out you could wash clothes with one of them. You take a little unit and it vibrates at a supersonic rate and pounds the dirt out of clothes. They manufactured these, but one day they found out they weren’t selling any; they looked at the books and found out they weren’t making any money. So they went around and asked people why, and the housewives said, “For some strange reason I just feel terrible around that machine.” So the company got very smart and went back and figured out a few things and a few angles and put out one that worked at a different vibration rate, and now they sell those things rather easily because people feel just wonderful around them. In other words, there is some lower harmonic, or, one could postulate, the actual wavelength of the MEST which is mixed in with Theta is along in that supersonic band someplace. There is a MEST vibration there. That really postulates some terrific things.

All I am pointing out is that the tone scale evidently has an actual vibration rate for its various levels. There is a wavelength; there is an ARC wavelength all the way up the line. Maybe we can’t measure it in Theta, and we might not be able to do anything about it on the Theta level for some time — until we know how to manufacture Theta — but we certainly can approximate it in the MEST universe. Somebody is going to have to tackle this one of these days, and go on up the line and find out exactly what are the vibration rates in MEST for each one of these points.

This would make it very interesting for an auditor. He could reach over to the vibrator and turn on 0.5, grief, and tell the preclear to go back and blow the secondary, and it would blow. This would be making the MEST part of the organism vibrate so strongly to this level on the tone band that the preclear would be there.

We are evidently playing around with something which is highly mechanical when we play around with this tone scale. MEST gets along best at about 4.0; the MEST part of an organism gets along best at 4.0. I think above that line it starts to evaporate — have you seen any saints lately?

But below 4.0 it is less and less an optimum joining-up with Theta, and the body is worse and worse off. MEST seems to function at a certain vibration rate. This is nothing very peculiar, because anybody who does any thinking on the subject of what reality is eventually comes to the conclusion that he is dealing with vibration rates — the vibration rates of what, we don’t bother to say. All that matter and energy could be, really, is a motion in space and time. What space and time are and if they are a motion or not, I can’t say for sure just now; it is kind of confusing. But evidently all reality is, is a motion, a certain wavelength of motion. If you go on that level it achieves results. It achieved results in this tone scale.

We have been working on this vibrator machine for some time now, so something like that is going to come to pass. But it will never come to the pass of no auditor — not until we find out how to bottle Theta. One of these days, if we suddenly learn how to bottle up Theta and do other things with it and handle it, that might be the case. Evidently, all that would happen if you used a vibrator as I described would be that you would make it possible for the enMEST, or enturbulated MEST, which is holding the entheta in line, to bleed off; all the auditor would have to do is keep straightening out the Theta side of it, if these theories and postulates are correct. All that has to be gone into considerably.

What is important right now is the fact that we have all this on a chart. We have had this graph for some little time, and here we are making the fullest use out of it. By observation we find out what the behavior is on this and we find out the behavior holds constantly on this thing. There are various aspects and manifestations of it, and there are certain ways you ask questions about it.

In the second part of this lecture we will go into exactly how you apply it to the preclear.