First hour of try night, December the 4th, we’re going to cover here the logics. The last evening lectures I covered these Qs.

Let’s go on now as to how you use these… these points on some of these… some of this material. This is the second hour of December 4th. Now let’s go on to how we use some of these materials in auditing and why it is an apparent uh… upset to a preclear to be disoriented.

All right, the logics are something which evidently apply quite broadly and uh… are not necessarily fixed for all universes but are quite general to universes and are certainly very specific for this universe. Logics would consist of methods of thinking. There could be many, many methods of thinking.

We’re operating, of course, from Q-1 and that says creation of uh… space, time, energy, matter, location in this. You see, if a man can’t locate himself in space and time, why, he can’t locate himself – well, he just can’t locate himself. And therefore it says he’s not theta. He’s MEST because MEST is what can’t locate itself.

You take the decimal system. Uh… the decimal system is a method of thinking about object;, and particles, and so on. And it says if you take ten of them and then multiply them by ten all you have to do is add another zero. Uh… that’s a very fascinating system and this has a great deal of argument, however, from something I think is called the sept-signal system, which I think is by twelves or something like that. Sixes, twelves, and so forth; they claim this is a much, much better numerical system.

Somebody always has to locate MEST. That’s why you have surveyors. MEST never has been known… a roadside rock has never been known to get up and say to you, „Hello, what’s your name? Uh… where are you going?“ Nope, never been known to. Sometimes a roadside rock says „Milestone 26,“ but somebody put that on that.

It goes along so and so and does such and such. And the odd part of it is, is it forms a different structure of logic. So you could change logic by changing the basic postulates on which the logic is based.

So the difference between being MEST and being theta is location in space. That’s the difference between the two things. MEST has… now when I say MEST is, I’m using our old word as to mean object, a solid object, and the space and energy and so forth which comprise such solid objects, the energy flows itself, and the space therein; I’m using just that term physical universe MEST.

You could simply say, you could simply say, now it is logical to state the plus and the minus of a thing, and that is all you should state, the plus and minus of the thing. Plus you should never state the plus without stating the minus. And that is going to be logic.

All right, uh… when a person goes down the tone scale, that is going down from a concept of being able to locate or originate in space, originate space, down to being a chunk of something that’s been located. Now, in other words, it goes from theta, tone scale goes from theta to MEST. And, of course, MEST has always got theta in it but that… that’s beside the point.

Now we would say something like that, you get something interesting about – the logical statement will be: I think I would like to eat dinner, perhaps I will not. And that would be a reasonable statement, and that would be a universe called maybe. A universe… a universe in which homo sapiens is quite at home.

It has gone to the point where it doesn’t do the locating but somebody locates it. And even though a piece of MEST is used for propulsion or for shoveling or for pushing or for pulling or anything like that, there’s theta directing it.

All social intercourse is apparently a long series of maybes. You know, you say, „How do you do? I don’t care how you do.“ „Would you have something to eat? I hope you won’t eat too much.“ Except the second maybe in social intercourse is never stated.

So an individual conceives himself to be as free, as knowing, as much cause as he can locate himself in space or create space. He’s so… as long as he can do that.

So it’s a long series of maybes and if you want to find somebody who’s been very very social for a long time you will find out his ARC relationships lie all in a ball. All wound up in one small tight ball, because everyone of them has got a plus on it and a minus on it, and the minus is never stated.

Now you get somebody out in the country and he gets lost, well, he’s not terribly lost, he can look at the vegetation and he can look at the road and he can look at things and he said, „Look, somebody with three-dimensional space on the brain built all this, I’m still here, uh… somewhere. As I just have lost the difference between my immediate new anchor points and the anchor points to which I’m accustomed and I do not know the dimension from here to the point of origin from which I normally operate. I don’t know that distance.“ And so he says he’s lost, but actually just to that degree produces the most fantastic results on an individual.

Now in view of the fact that Scientology is the science of knowing how to know, we have to have some definition of knowledge. Now these logics as they are written here have to be rewritten slightly for the echelon of Scientology in which we are operating, which is to say the make-break of universes.

You take a… a… fellow out here in the woods and there’s nothing but trees, trees, trees and all the trees look like more trees. And everything is unfamiliar, anchor points gone, and, believe me, it’s a very solid guy who doesn’t lose his head. I have seen fellows just go so pale green with… with a fear – they go right on down the tone scale. They don’t know what they’re afraid of. They haven’t any idea what they’re doing or what’s happening. And they will run aimlessly. They’ll do the strangest things: They will be very hungry and throw their pack away. They will desperately need their rifle and cartridges and throw them in the nearest creek. They will walk in circles, oddly enough. They… they seem possessed with an inability to take straight lines.

This is very very true of homo sapiens, these logics, but they have to be refined just a little bit in order to fit them into a wider category.

You meet up with one of these fellows, quite ordinarily he’s in a panic. It takes a long time; a woodsman has learned to be calm in the presence of all anchor points looking like all anchor points and no dimension known to the anchor point he wants, because he knows by experience that he can still find a dimension.

Logic one is knowledge as a whole group. There are lists of these around, in these various books. Knowledge as a whole group or subdivision of a group of data or speculations or conclusions on data or methods of gaining data. That pins knowledge down as data. And that’s true for homo sapiens. And that is true for the type of logic homo sapiens uses.

What the other fellow doesn’t know is he can’t find a dimension. He doesn’t know he can find a dimension anymore. And that unability to find a dimension upsets him terribly. And is that fear of not being able to find a dimension which keeps your preclear from changing anything. He is sure that if he loses his dimensions, he’s gone. He’s just sure of that. If he loses anchor points and dimensions he’s a gone fellow.

That does not happen to be the highest level of knowledge. The highest level of knowledge is the potential of – it’s an action definition – the potential of knowing how to know. And that consists of simply the potential of knowing how to know. I’m sorry, but that’s all there is to it. And how do you know? Well, in order to know how to know you have to be free to postulate knowledge. And the freedom to postulate knowledge creates the data which then arranges itself as bodies of knowledge. So, you want to know what your highest echelon of knowledge possibly could be, it would probably be complete freedom to make the postulate to form any… any datum or group of data without even making the postulate to do so.

That’s why young fellows go down tone scale so badly on this thing that’s laughingly called universal military training. Somebody grabs him by the nape of the neck, throws him into a brand-new set of anchor points and says, „These are your anchor points, Bud. Your MEST.“ Now this fellow’s idea of this – new spaces he will occupy and so forth – has a terrible abyss lying between his teens and his ability to occupy any space in the society and have anchor points in the society. And that abyss is somebody standing there saying, „Now, you’re going to have anchor points according to our direction, you’re going to be transported, transshipped, removed and uh… no anchor point with which you’ve been accustomed, and for a couple of years you can count, as far as you’re concerned, on being MEST and being utterly lost.“

And that, that would be knowing how to know, so logic… logic one should be rewritten: Knowing how to know is the definition of the highest level of knowingness. And that the level of knowingness is the freedom to state a postulate which then can become knowledge. Now that’s very simple.

And they go just boom. You can watch them, they go down tone scale. Their plans for the future and all that sort of thing have a tendency to go by the boards. This is the lousiest trick that could ever be pulled on a country. Instead of paying a little bit more for soldiers and making a little bit of their life a little bit more interesting than kicking up a few wars to keep the troops happy – something like that – they make it a compulsory supercontrol operation.

Logic two, a body of knowledge is a body of data aligned or unaligned or methods of gaining data. Well, that’s… that’s interesting too. That just simply says it’s a… a body of knowledge could consist of one postulate or two postulates. And that’s all. And that would be a body of knowledge and if they were stated from… for this universe, they have to be two. And they were stated… they have to be two to be a unit. I’ll explain that a little later. Uh… but, then… then a body of data could be any two data to make a com… a very complete workable body of knowledge.

As a matter of fact, a… a few boys from Batten, Barton, Durstine and Osburn got together and figured out how do we make military life interesting so as to get lots of recruits? Why, uh… they put their heads together; they’d say, „Well now, let’s see, let’s have canteen – no, let’s have company hostesses. Aha ha-ha, yeah, that’s good. Company hostesses – no, squad hostesses. Terrific overproduction of women in this country; there’s 15 million of them are going to be unmarried to the end of their days. Let’s see, we’ll take the statistics so we can prove it to the government.“ „Therefore company, no, squad. No, I think there oughta be a senior and a junior hostess to every squad. And, uh… let’s see, there should be uh… should be, uh… let’s pep these uniforms up a little bit – these boys walking around in olive drab, we’ve chosen in the past, the ugliest, messiest uniform we could possibly imagine. Well, let’s get somebody down in the Arts Department to draw one up.“

Now, let… let’s have a whole body of knowledge. Now let’s think one up, let’s think real hard for earth here. Let’s postulate good and evil. Now let’s postulate from good and evil enough other data to make a full body of knowledge which would be very satisfying. Let’s think in a nice wide curve here. We say good and evil. That can lead in two directions.

„Okay, now, let’s fix it over on the citizen front there so that people who neglect to service this uniform properly, and so forth, they get their taxes increased. Yeah, that’s a good idea. That makes the boys happy. Naw, that wouldn’t work because that’s too compulsory.“

That can lead to God and the devil, complete bodies of knowledge. But those are sub-bodies of knowledge to the body good and evil. Now on the other side of it – justice and injustice – and what do we get? We get the church and the state – that’s immediately descending from the postulate that two things can exist called good and evil. Now we say what is good? We could be Aristotelian and say: Good is something which isn’t evil, and what is evil? Evil is something which is not good.

„Let’s see, I know, we’ll… we’ll just get the democratic administration or the republican administration or somebody to write some more figures on a book up in Wall Street that somebody keeps up there so they can write some more books on the figures down in the Treasury Department down here and what we laughingly call money will be then issued in superfluity to these troops and we will have troop money which buys twice as much as any other kind of money. Yeah, that’s very interesting.“

Now we can have a universe in which all things good were purple and all things bad were magenta. So that people would get snarled up between the two when they were a little color-blind and that would cause randomity.

„Now, let’s… let’s stop all this walking. That… that walking is bad, the boys don’t like to walk, and let’s get each one of them a, well, I don’t know, a motorcycle, how about a hotrod? They are cheap to produce. And we’ll have squads of hotrods and senior and junior… Let’s put another hostess in that squad. And uh… let’s… let’s have three times a week – see, they haven’t looked at the ages that they’re getting into the army – three times a week, at least, we will have all the malted milks and hamburgers you can uh… possibly eat for suppers. Yeah, that’s a pretty good idea. And we’ll have an issue of chewing gum, good, solid issue of chewing gum, so on. Good.“

In this universe we have more or less conceived that good is white and black is evil. So we get the black and white and good and evil and we really get the opening of aesthetics. Now we’ve got church, state and the arts, proceeding from one set of postulates.

And what do you know, they wouldn’t have to have universal military service, but universal militaries have to work for that so nobody’d bother on this other line. Being a little bit snide on that, but uh… it’s a good thing.

See, that becomes a body of knowledge. Now we’ll just… we’ll just put bric-a-brac on these things. And hang all sorts of bric-a-brac in various directions. We’ll put all the speculations of Martin Luther and uh… confront these with the speculations of Sigmund Freud. And uh… we’ll mess that up with Bismarck’s attitudes and throw in the writings of Machiavelli, sort them very nicely into one big bin of scrambled facts and you have the humanities.

Now, of course because every time… every time you get a control army, then you have to have somebody to hate. That makes it necessary to go on having the army and it gets very complex after a while.

Uh… first we have then this… that’s a body of knowledge. But don’t, in Scientology now at this time, confuse the potentiality to make a postulate with data. Because the two are not related. The two can be connected, but just because one has the potentiality of making a postulate which then can become a body of knowledge does not mean that one has to make a postulate.

Now, uh… I think – uh… what is it? One hundred and eighteen percent of the national budget goes for the maintenance of our military defenses. Well, you might as well take over three or four states and turn them over to the teenagers and uh… and… and just have a good time for a couple of years. I mean if somebody solved war you could do that. Now, let’s get off of that subject for a minute.

He might never make the postulate but this doesn’t. take away from him the right to make a postulate. So a body of knowledge, we might have… this fellow might have a… a whole great big pile of whuf – a huge pile of whuf and there it is. And never do a single thing about it. He’s got it. Other people could come along and say, „Well, why don’t you whuficate that stuff.“ But it wouldn’t matter a darn whether he did or not. He’s… he’s got the whuf.

The reason why those guys get lost is anchor points and then nobody lets them put in items. They got to have the uniform that’s issued. Ta-ta-ta- ta-ta-ta-ta-ta. Just exactly what it says, and you got to do this with this equipment. And we give you this but you don’t own it.

Now that is a much lower echelon than not having anything. Not having anything is about as high as you can get. You know the old Chinese legend that the uh… the uh… head of a Chinese state or the emperor or his chamberlain or somebody had a daughter and the daughter is very, very ill and the doctors all got around – they were members of the American medical Association. They all got around and they said, „Well, you’ll have to cover them with the shirt of a happy man, and wh… that is our equivalent of penicillin. We’ve made a postulate that that exists and uh… have to find the shirt of a perfectly happy man and put that upon her and your daughter will then be well.“

Now we give you this rifle, but you don’t own that. Now we give you this uniform, but you don’t own that. Now, we’ll come around and see if you’re keeping this rifle right, and this tank right and this uniform right, and everything is right and you don’t own that but it’s yours. And you’re going to get practically machine-gunned if you don’t keep this equipment good, you understand? But you don’t own it and we’ll make sure you don’t own it, and so forth; now you control it but don’t own it. Now you locate it in space, exactly where we tell you to locate it, and you only put it in space where we tell you to locate it or else. Isn’t that great? I mean you couldn’t figure out a lower tone scale operation than this whole thing.

And so the chamberlain and the king called in all these couriers and messengers, sent them north, east, south and west, and they all rode and rode and rode and batches of them started coming back all footsore and weary and… and with their horses caved in and they hadn’t been able to find a happy man and she was just about to expire and… and the last… the last doctor was being hanged and in came the last messenger and he looked at the king or the chamberlain or whoever it was and he says, „I did find a happy man,“ and very eagerly because the last breaths were just coming out of the girl by that time.

What’s the… what’s the answer then on the whole track? The MEST universe is doing this to the preclear. Now I’ve been talking about the army, but the actual fact of the matter is I’ve been talking about inhabitants of the MEST universe.

The King says, „Well, give me…“ and the fellow said, „He didn’t have a shirt.“ So you see, there is… there’s a large difference though between… you see the reason man’s, by the way, never been able to resolve that little lesson, the reason he’s never been able to resolve it, is because he considered himself potentially what he was, was something that didn’t have to have, didn’t have to want, and so he knew very well that the way to be perfectly happy was to have nothing – no objects, which didn’t give you any time. And you could sit down on a pink cloud and there you were. And you could just be serene. You could be serene for just ages and ages and ages. So what do we have? We have a fellow down tone scale who is in the situation of having to want. He is running a body. He has responsibilities added up in his society which consist of families, and employers, and pieces of MEST in general, other pieces of MEST and he’s got to work, in other words, in order to keep a supply line going because he’s in a time track because he’s got objects already running.

In they come, MEST universe says, „Now look, there’s a bunch of natural laws and bunch of agreements. And these are the anchor points and these are the only anchor points you can have and you locate yourself in the middle of these anchor points. And uh… you do just exactly with what… what… what with this planetary arrangement and these photons and so forth as we tell you, because this place is rigged to enforce itself upon you. And uh… you can’t have any of your own particles. And if you start using any, you’re going to get in trouble.“

And now we tell that fellow, now we try to tell him this philosophy: well, the happy man is the fellow who has nothing. Boy, he sure knows you’re wrong. He knows he’d only really be happy if he had this twenty-eight room house and nineteen hot and cold running servants and he… he’d only be really happy if he had these things.

And you get the same kind of a state of mind that you’d get as a teenager in the army on the part of MEST people. No responsibility, there’s nobody taking responsibility for this universe at all. It’s just sort of floating around like a Russian army.

And yet, yet, uh… if he gets those things he just reduces himself that much further to MEST. So he’s on a cycle which is very difficult to interrupt for him without knowing how to know. If he doesn’t know how to know, he cannot interrupt the cycle of having to want. Because having to want procures and procurement has to be selective between procuring what is desirable and not procuring what is not desirable.

Okay, here we have… here we have, then, the most fundamental process that you could run on a preclear, which is orientation in space, the most fundamental thing you can do. And that would consist of a very strange thing for one lifetime, the location of 0-1. What’s 0-1 for this preclear? What is the origin point he’s been using all of his life? He’s using one origin point or another all the way along the line, from his earliest childhood. What’s his origin point?

And one begins to make this selection back and forth this way and that, and he gets to have more that he doesn’t want and want more that he doesn’t have and his confusion on this line gets to be such finally that he is MEST and that’s the bottom of the actual cycle, to be an object.

Student: himself.

So the object of that sort of thing is to be an object. Well, you try to tell him about… about this thing – the way to have is to be happy is to not to Have and that sort of thing; he knows you’re nutty. Now a Hindu has a terrifically workable lot of data lurking in the midst of a terrific lot of very treacherous data.

LRH: No, it’s not. He has to have an anchor point. His origin point has been dependent upon, probably A, A-l, A-2. You see, he hasn’t got any location himself by agreement in this universe unless he has some anchor points that have to do with the MEST universe. He’s already given up the right to be his own anchor point and to choose for himself anchor points.

And so you get a rustic, a fakir, or a yogi low level sitting on a bed of spikes to discipline the body and telling himself, „I am training myself not to have and by this I shall ascend to and rise to the highest of controls and nirvanas.“ And there he sits with a body.

So he’s using an anchor point from somewhere in this lifetime somewhere on his track. What is it? You find out – what are those anchor points? This is surprising, but you will find out it’s such a thing as the fireplug which stood outside his house when he was a little boy. That is one of his anchor points. The other anchor point may be a small hill which was about eight miles south of his home where he used to… he used to be able to look out the window and see this hill. Those were the anchor points of the world. And as a little child, if you would have gone up to him as a little child and you could say, „How big is this world?,“ he would say, „Well it… it goes, well, it’s… it’s uh… way over from that fireplug there and it’s way over from that hill and it goes down… well, I know a canyon down the line, it’s pretty deep, it’s a hundred feet deep, and it goes down there, and every once in a while the stars come out and they’re over a mile high. And there they are, and that’s… that’s… that’s the universe and that’s it.“

Now you can talk about playing tricks on a fellow – he’s playing tricks on himself; he… he’s got something that has to want continually and here he sits with something that does and he says at the same time, „I will be only… I will only be happy if I do not have and therefore I must deny everything.“ And so he gets where? He gets on a maybe. And it’s from that datum it can be said that the very confusing quality of Indian practices arise.

And you would have said, „How about the Germans? How about the Japanese? How about the uh… Russians? How about uh… uh… the Kentuckians? Uh… anything.“

He knows by instinct that he’d be happiest if he didn’t have, and he’s still holding on to something because he doesn’t know how to get rid of it completely. He’s holding on to something that has to want. And so he’s on a maybe. And he gets: „Is God there? Isn’t God there? Am I in communication with Him? Am I not in communication? What things are around me? Is it true or is it false or what is or what isn’t?“ and on this big maybe he rides himself right on in. It’s no joke; I’ve known a lot of those boys.

And he would have said, „Well, obviously they must be just beyond there. I’ll have to ask somebody. I’ll… I’ll… I’ll get… get somebody to pack me a lunch and I’ll walk over and see them.“

Logic three: any knowledge that can be sensed, measured, experienced by any entity is capable of influencing that entity. Too true. Just too true. This is, by the way, an interesting logic in that… in that it is aimed right straight at a fellow by the name of uh… I think it’s Kant. Uh… I guess it’s an impossible name like that… and with a name like that you’d sure expect that he wouldn’t be able to. And he sure couldn’t.

He just hasn’t any concept of any dimension between himself and Russia, no concept. If… if he were told that a raging war were going on as the children were in World War II – he knew a raging war was going on and uh… he… he just… he… he knew where it was going on. It was quite real to him. That war was real close to home; it was just on the other side of that hill. And he would take it pretty seriously. It was right close to home. And other people would have been up and looked around and so forth. They, people who lived in that neighborhood and been out driving and so forth, they knew it wasn’t there at all. They knew there was no dimension between them and that war, except maybe Johnny and Johnny was in that war, and he used to write letters and it took the letters four days to get home. So there was a four-day dimension between themselves and the war and that was pretty close.

Now that’s our friend Kant and that’s… all knowledge that is worth having will be found to be beyond the bounds of human experience. So you better quit right here at this barricade, fellow, because us scholastics have got it all nailed down. We got a machine gun and barbed wire across here and anything that’s worth having is over here and this is the last outpost toward it, and if you try and pass it we’re going to fix your crock.

And there were other fellows who didn’t get any letters from Johnny so they didn’t have any dimension to the war at all. So they just sat around and figured out how much they could make.

For a hundred and sixty-two years that philosophy pervaded Western philosophy and monitored it to such a degree that today you go out in Podunk and down on Ray Street and ask people offhand; you say, „Now what, what would you think of somebody who would dare to investigate the actual beingness and soul of man?“

You ask your preclear on an E-Meter what his… what his anchor points are and this was his gyration. And, what do you know, he’ll have visios on them. They’ll be static, cherished visios, and he’s… he… he’ll turn these visios around once in a while and throw them behind him. And he’ll look at them and you get them on the track; it’ll be some fixed position.

„Oh, you mustn’t do that. No, that’d be very, very bad, because if you found out there’d be no more universes or something.“ Now, that’s the… that is the… I think that’s called transcendental logic or realism or something; it’s wonderful stuff.

It might be… one of them might be a fireplace, maybe not in his own home at all, but in a neighbor’s house. That was a piece of space he could own. It was perfectly all right with this neighbor if he owned that fireplace. They was always nice to him, gave him cookies, place calm, peaceful – own home might not have been.

Any datum worth having, then, is beyond man’s power to know. And that is sure enough sheer by the bucketful class A quality hogwash. It’s not true, it never has been true because it states that in this universe a one-way flow can exist. It says you can never backlash up a communication line and that’s sure wrong. There isn’t a piece of wire in any electronics laboratory nor a piece of MEST anywhere in any planet, not a piece of space manufactured anywhere in this universe which will not conduct both ways.

So he had an origin point and uh… it was… it was one of his anchor points. And the other one – he had a teacher who was nice to him, and this teacher had a house on the other side of town. So between the fireplace and the house on the other side of town he could shift around, himself, and to really have a good set he’d have to have a third, so maybe it was Bill’s house.

Now that engineers can figure them and figure them, and rig them and rig them and rig them but they still won’t get one that will put up one hundred percent butterfly valves along the whole length of it. If you pour juice in that way, there can juice go back that way again. That’s the wrong way to think about it, that there can be a one-way flow.

And he’d have these three anchor points, and so his origin point is only apparently here in 1952, 53. Only apparently, and it’s not here at all, and the guy’s been lost for years and years and years, and he doesn’t even know it, because he has no line of dimension between where he finds himself at this moment and – he just never thought about this – and the A-l, A-2, A-3.

They’d have you think that this… and we are the puppets of some sort of a monitoring agency which could command us and affect us and influence us and yet we would never be able to contact nor experience the puppet master. Well, to hell with the puppet master.

He is operating now from A-10,065, N-10,066, and A-10,067. And these are his three anchor points. But he is still at 0-1.

That is the philosophy. I hope no man ever falls into that trap because it blocked human thought and human progress. Philosophy became completely abandoned as a subject. Would you believe it that even at this moment, this subject has been in existence for… more or less for two and a half years, and even at this moment they still give a Doctor of Philosophy degree in universities which demands only this of the student: that he know what philosophers have said. Now that’s incredible; if you had a Doctor of Philosophy you would expect a Doctor of Philosophy to be able to philosophize.

So we get 0-1 prime and A-10,066, A-10,067, and A-10,068. And, what do you know, his level of reality is practically zero.

And a person… the professors of those courses would just be shocked beyond shock if you dared come in and infer that the end and goal of their students should be the production of philosophy. No sir, that’s how you keep a society static.

Oh boy, is he not here! He just is not present, that’s all. Why? There’s no relationship between these things and A-l, A-2, and 3. There’s no dimension; the fellow’s lost. And he’ll give that lost appearance. You take one of these persons; you try to spring him out of his head and he says, „No… no, I’m not moving out of my head.“

This society… this society actually was penalized to an enormous degree by that block on the philosophic line. It’s much more intimate to thee and me than you would suppose, because in the field of science they long since learned that in the natural study of use of natural law and the exactness of the agreements which had been made, that an enormous number of effects could be produced.

Now you can say it’s ridges, it’s smidges, uh… it’s anything you want, but he isn’t in his head. He’s standing back at the corner of 16th and Van Buren in the year 1928. There he is. He knows better than to get any further than 16th and Van Buren, because that’s in rollerskating distance to A-1, A-2 and A-3.

And since Immanuel Kant, assembly line rifles, automobiles, assembly line machine guns, rapid-firing naval cannon, steel ships, aeroplanes, atom bombs and H-bombs have been invented without what happening in philosophy? Just… just a dead blank. Now if somebody had been actually with some… some sensitivity that we shouldn’t really override the humanities just because we have a clear road here…

You will find the most… you will find grief charges – grief charges – on the first time a kid had to abandon his anchor points. He’s gotten accustomed to them, and the first time he had to abandon them… and you get him returning to his home town and if somebody’s moved one of his anchor points he’s just shot. He’s just in a mess; and so he’ll hold on to the facsimile of the anchor point and take his whole track and jam it from that anchor point on up to now, because he knows that there’s distances involved and being distances involved he’s got to jam his track down to match his original anchor points so that he’s still there, so he’s not lost.

There ought to be some other road in the field of humanities there. There ought to be some parallel track. We haven’t got a society that knows anything about these things.

And then you come along and ask this fellow to get rid of his facsimiles – oh no you won’t! And you say, „All right fellow, now let’s get rid of these anchor points, and really get lost.“ Uh-uh. He isn’t even vaguely going to do it.

Well, what are we doing? We got atom bombs around here and there’s no danger with the control of an atom bomb. All you’ve got to do is push a button and there’s no danger about it. If you don’t push the button it won’t explode, and if you do push the button it will explode; the control of the atom bomb is an assured fact. It’s utterly certain that if you push a button of an atom bomb it’s going to blow. So you… there’s no danger or trouble with control of nuclear fission.

He’s going to find more excuses; he’ll jump up off the couch and smoke cigarettes, and he’ll claim that it’s his… it’s how mean people were to him and how this wasn’t none of his behavior and it was action, it was ideas and it was this and that and the other thing, and you’ll look down at his anchor points. Because we’re going on all out here on theta clearing, we want to get to collect the fellow to a point.

The boys have done a very good job, but how do you control the human being who pushes the button? And so we get Uncle Joe, uh… Uncle Joe and other characters around that may rush around, and they think the hottest way to do this to to make a… a secret society out of atomic science, as their first answer.

We’ve got to collect the fellow to a point. And what is the point? He’s got to have a viewpoint from which he could postulate other points – and if he doesn’t have a point, from which to do this, why, he’s in terrible shape; and we look down the track and we find our preclears who are very hard to move out of their heads and be certain where they are, are people who have been scattered all over hell’s creation and have, in one lifetime year after year after year – were moved about, moved about, pushed about, pushed about, their possessions taken away from them, their possessions lost, their possessions broken up and particularly their anchor points.

Now we’ve got to have a sort of an atomic police and none of this data can get out in any way, shape or form; and we’ve got to throw the barricades down, not just on trade but on the free knowledge of science which should circulate amongst all lands and which itself is the best guarantee of peace.

You’ll find that after a while every time they have been driven off from a space – in any way – they’ve gone in near hysterics. Or any time anybody’s tried to pin them down into a space. For instance, somebody who comes by and arrests them, something, and puts them in jail. They just go into… all to pieces. Because that’s really getting lost, that’s too much stress of imposition of anchor point. And they can’t stand it. They just go to pieces on it.

So not only do we produce the ultimate weapon but we produce at the same time a new barricade. Science is out of circulation with science today. And it’s going further and further out. Now that’s very interesting. An imbalance like that has been happening almost by the square. It is happening with a rush. We’re seeing the fruition of all of that misconcept at this time.

Now, anchor point is necessary to have motion, so what do you find quite in addition to this? You’ll find that this preclear who has lost his anchor points and lost his anchor points, has lost his motion and lost his motion…

Actually, the only real danger an atom bomb is as far as thee and me are concerned is simply that somebody might bust loose with one of the doggone things and cost us some time, that’s all. We’ve got a spielplatz here called Earth and… and uh… uh… it’s… it’s… we need it for a short time and they keep trying to mess up the playing field.

For a while his motion was dispersing – oh, badly dispersing – and uh… he was trying frantically to keep it up and pretend all was well. And he knew where he was, he knew where he was, yes sir – but did he?

I’m trying to do something about it, but not… not a bad sad hope either.

There’d be a little voice behind him, „You don’t know where you are, do you?“ And uh… pretty soon, why, somebody comes along and tells him he’s mean and he’s ornery, and he’s no good, and he got no force, and he mustn’t use force, and he becomes convinced that force is no good, too.

All right, that knowledge which cannot be sensed, measured or experienced by any entity or type of entity cannot influence that entity or type of entity.

Well, of course, he can’t produce force if he’s lost his anchor points. That’s the essence of production of force is to have terminals. Now, we’re really sneaking up on electricity. You understand we’re not talking here about electricity.

If nobody to date has been able to actually spot with a meter the existence of commands from a Supreme Being… you see, he’s got no reason or right to keep insisting that people receive commands from a Supreme Being. He has no reality on it. He… he couldn’t… he couldn’t get a good agreement on this except on a stampede basis. It cannot be scientifically established the geographical location of a fellow by the no… name of the Supreme Being, MEST universe. That can’t be established.

We don’t want in any way to influence the field of engineering. They’ve got some agreements pinned down and they’re stuck with them. And uh… they… we don’t want to interfere with that. So don’t apply any of this material to mathematics or engineering. We don’t want… this stuff wouldn’t change it anyway, I mean.

A lot of fellows been trying that. This does not say that there aren’t such things as gods and makers of gods. But it does say that this cardboard thing-a-ma-bob that they sell by painting signs on the rocks probably isn’t sending out anything for us to experience at all.

Uh… so let’s look, then – the first thing on orientation – let’s look for his original anchor points and see if we can find them. And, of course, his first anchor points in what you call home universe are lost to him. They’re gone. Home universe… boy, you can always get a grief charge on it. So, the home of his very early childhood is usually lost to him as well. So, he’s… on the whole track; he’s been lost and lost and lost and lost and lost. He keeps getting… you want to know long a spiral is? A spiral is as long as one can keep himself convinced he isn’t lost utterly.

Why? We can’t measure it. That’s a heck of an arbitrary scale, isn’t it? Well, the dickens it is. We’ve been able to measure everything else. In absence of that we’ve been driven to this incredible length. In absence of trying to find a Supreme being for this universe, why we’ve been driven to the incredible length of having to discover that uh… uh… probably the mostest god you’ll ever know is you in this universe and uh… for lack of a… lack of a nice big fellow who anthromorphically sits on a throne and uh… has a greed for adulation which would be found disgusting in any mortal (I’m quoting the Greeks now. The sources of Christianity, Plato, the great pagan, he’s their sole reason for authority). Anyway, didn’t you know that, that Christianity is based upon the writings of Plato, and the Catholic Church at all times when challenged about its doctrines has uniformly referred to the authority called Plato? You understand I’m not… not in any way, sense or form against the Church. I think the Church is a good organization. But we got a better one now.

Now long is a lifetime? A lifetime is as long as one can keep himself convinced he isn’t lost utterly.

Now there’s something else that goes with that which I ought to say to an auditor. He’s going to discover more half-known thing-a-ma-bobs and what-nots in preclears with this stuff than he cares to count up.

Why do people out in the corn belt sometimes live to the age of 8,000 or whatever some of them claim? Why… why is that? They’ve never gotten lost. And, by the way, some of those uh… octogenarians and so forth quite commonly make a practice of propelling themself not by any other conveyance than shank’s mares, walking the distances they want to go. It’s with perfect confidence one of those old fellows would suddenly say, „Well, I’m going down to see Sister Bess now.“

If he had one of these Chinese things that does addition in incredible numbers – I think it’s above an ENIAC in the number of figures it will carry or something – he would not be able to count off in a career of one year of auditing and Dianetics all the screwball things that he will run into and it’s a very, very good thing, a very good thing, to go along the line of what you actually know as a certainty and to lay off in receiving communication from your preclear and in trying to establish this, that and the other thing about the preclear, what you cannot discover as a certainty.

And somebody would look at him aghast and say, „But that’s over a hundred and eighty miles.“

The E-Meter is a fair certainty of establishment. When your preclear starts to tell you that he is immediately in connection with the upper, higher key of the left-hand side of Betelgeuse, when he tells you this and says that he has positive information that you are about to be wiped out at thirteen-thirty o’clock, you say, „Okay, now let’s get a mock-up of…“

And he’d say, „Well, sure, it’s going to take me a couple, three, four days to make it.“ He had measured every inch of the way and observed every inch of the way.

I told you when the class began about that thing about the Prince of Darkness. That’s routine. Sure, sure, there’s all types of odds and ends of communications that are coming through and being taped onto your preclear. But, you’re underestimating the power of thee, you’re just completely underestimating it. Nothing can tamper with you unless you agree to permit it to. And there is no stronger law in this universe really than that, as far as protection is concerned.

Now if he went down there at 80 miles an hour, it is sort of swoosh, and by the time he gets there it’s been a blur and he’s not well connected with it. You would have to get somebody well speeded up to remove him in distance that much.

If you start saying this is destructive it can only then become so. Now, people can be hit with force because they have agreed that force is destructive and only then can force hit them. That person who has not agreed upon the destructivity of force would theoretically be untouchable by it.

Out in space people are really speeded up. They think very hectically and so forth. Brrrr. All of that space, but, gee, you can see anchor points a long distance. You can see ‘em many light years, and so you can move around to that degree.

We tell this story. I ran this out of a preclear one time. Didn’t run it out of a preclear, preclear told me about running it.

Who is this fellow? Well, this fellow is the fellow who used to have as anchor points Star X, Star Y and Star Z. He didn’t even live on a planet. You know that he would consider himself… that would be as big as his anchor points were.

Way back on the first area of track… there are three areas to these tracks, you know, for each person. There is thetan plus thetan, there is thetan versus bodies. And then there’s bodies versus bodies. And you can divide the track roughly into those sections. The earliest portion of it is thetan versus thetan, the middle portion of it is thetan versus bodies and the latter portion of it is, of course, bodies versus bodies.

It’s a very good thing to take out a little kid when he’s very, very young and show him some stars and say, „That is Betelgeuse. That is only – – light years away; it’s a long way away. Now that’s Betelgeuse. Now we’ll take that and we’ll look at it in a telescope and examine that thoroughly and it’s in relation to star so-and-so. And this is Mizar and that’s Marcab, and that’s the North Pole, and that’s some other star. Now you see those stars? Now, they don’t exactly look different, I mean they… they look a little different when you look at them from another point, they… they get closer together when you look at them from another point, because they’re distances apart. But you can look right here now and you can see these stars and you can locate them and you’ll always know they’re there. Take a look.“

Now that means that if you’re looking for basic-basic on DEDs and DEDEXs and so on, you’re going to find them rather uniformly on thetan versus thetan, not thetan versus bodies.

I ran into a fellow whose father was an astronomer. He was one of the most unlost fellows you ever saw until we got into the Southern Hemisphere. This boy was a navigator, and he was an aerial navigator. Aerial navigators are very smart boys. They… they’re very sharp, they know what they’re doing and so forth. And the grim joke is they think a surface navigator, a marine navigator is something on a stick. They… they… they… they’re very… they’re very fascinated with surface navigation because they think that’s a sharp business.

Although, blanketing is a very easy place to go to. You have to know that on mock-ups by the way. It’s a lot more beneficial to take a couple of lighted electric light bulbs and turn them on and off and have the preclear smashing them together and breaking them and doing that sort of thing than it is to have the preclear doing the things with spots of lights on the body.

Sure enough, it is, uh… in standpoint of error, but the surface navigator isn’t going 350 miles an hour. These boys know their navigation inside-out and they’ve always approached a surface navigator with reverence for some reason or other. Maybe that’s because a surface navigator demands it.

Well anyway, way back on the track… he is sitting there doing nothing and life was interesting to him and very pleasant and a bunch of thetans came around, about a hundred thetans, and said, „Do you know that you can’t fight a hundred thetans?“

We got down in the… down in the Southern Hemisphere, and this kid started looking at the Southern Cross. And he became… first he became very excited and then he got sadder and sadder and sadder, and I’ve never known to this day exactly what it was until the other day I was figuring out what this was, and the fellow had lost his points of origin.

„Aw go on, I’m not interested in fighting a hundred thetans, go on your way.“ And they tried to flip energy at him and of course he wouldn’t tune up to the energy; he didn’t think it was dangerous – it was just going right on by him and he wasn’t paying any attention to it. And they said, „Well, how do you know you can’t fight a hundred thetans? Why don’t you try to… you haven’t convinced us that you can’t fight a hundred thetans.“ Well, this got him kind of sore, which is the trick.

He was gone, he was obviously in another world somewhere. That Southern Cross in the southern sky is very spectacular and uh… you get far enough south down around New Zealand, if you’ve customarily lived in Canada, where he did, you get an almost completely different sky. Very interesting.

And uh… they got him to turn on so he would start blocking energy and then about a hundred thetans started dive bombing him with force beams and so forth, and started running around and around and he’s very successful at the first part of the battle; he’s knocking them left and right and then all of a sudden why of course he’s not. So he goes running around after that telling all the thetans he’d run into and so forth, „Do you know that you can’t fight a hundred thetans?“

All right, and uh… we’ve got uh… we’ve got then your question of this. In this life, a fellow cannot change his physical identity. If he could change his physical identity, his beingness and so forth to match his new anchor points, he would be all right, but he isn’t permitted to do that.

Well, it’s an incredible thing now there that… that gives you an example. Let’s say you’re sitting there and your preclear says, „You know ah anama and I da da and I was da da and these Venusian psychiatrists and so on and it’s just going to happen to you any minute and uh… so on,“ or „We should get into contact with this,“ so on. Why, give me then the modern equivalent of „Go over it again“: „Let’s get another mock-up on this now,“ because uh… if you say, „They are? What? By golly, you know, maybe you can’t fight a hundred thetans; I’ll have to find out“ – because these characters don’t have a MEST entrance point immediately handy.

He has a connecting link, he has the same name, with A-l, A-2, A-3, with A,1066, A,1067 and A,1068. He has the same name, he has the same body, he knows, he has the same relatives, and he’s got a lot of other things, and every time these pop up, they keep reminding him that he is not on his anchor points and he doesn’t quite know where those anchor points are. And as a net result he’s quite confused.

Just remember that, they don’t have a MEST entrance point. So deal in certainties. Deal in certainties. Know only that you know and go on from there. And when you know that you know, why operate. Work on that data. That also tells you that you should separate data out into various bins.

Now, this has a great deal to do with the production of force. If it didn’t have anything to do with the production of force, it would not lead us through this maze, uh… because the production of force itself, and tolerance of force, is in itself affinity, reality, communication in this universe and the road out is the road through.

You take these bins and… and you… you can have, say you have several bins, and it’d be a gradient scale. You say, „All right, and we partially know about this and we know a little more about that and we don’t know anything about this over here on an evaluation of data; we haven’t got anything to measure this up to, but this we can correlate and coordinate and work with pretty well, now what part of it as we’re working is the most valuable to us?“

So every time we have a preclear who is sort of scattered and dispersed and he doesn’t quite know where he is, and he’s not oriented and so forth, let’s go through a little bit on space and find his origin points for him. Let’s relocate him and reorient him in space. That would be an awfully good idea, wouldn’t it? So here he is with space that he can’t control. And, sure enough, he’s worried about space being too crowded. He’s worried about space crowding in on him, claustrophobia. He’s worried about moving things around in space and keeping space neat. Or he is so careless that he doesn’t care WHAT space keeps neat. He’ll just throw things around in any space because that space isn’t his space anyhow.

It is always that portion of it of which you were the most certain. Now that is a conservative way of looking at things in one way, at one… in one direction it’s a conservative method of looking at something but actually it isn’t. I consistently have done this trick in investigation. I’ve taken all the maybes and thrown them out the window and hung onto a few certainties.

And he has a lot of points like this and he is just scattered. So you ask him to move out and be in a new space, why, shucks, his body isn’t in any space, much less the thetan. He isn’t in any space that he can recognize, as a body, and he’s just abandoned the whole thing anyhow… So, we have the three conditions here which will be general categories and you could call these cases then, case one, as an origin, case two, still as an origin, case three as an origin with dispersal, some dispersal, your case four as an origin, considerable dispersal, case five is uncollected, with sole point of origin as the body itself.

And then with those few certainties looked for some more certainties and then evaluated again and thrown out any less certain thing that was there and I’ve gone straight on through in that wise. That meant that you couldn’t work with MEST universe what is laughingly called data – and so this work is not a product of MEST universe data, but it’s an investigation of the track of the MEST universe. All right, an investigation of its track alone would be the same in the investigations as it would be with the auditor.

Now let’s just run a gradient scale between those two things. Case five is uncollected with a sole point of origin as the body itself and you can’t ask him to remove from the body because he knows nothing exists as anchor points outside of the body. He knows this.

The investigation is a parallel to an investigation that’s being carried on with an auditor, and every preclear is an adventure. They all have their differences, some of them are wilder than others, some of them more interesting than others. But in every one of them you are examining, first, a member of a universe in which you are also an inhabitant and, primarily, you are looking at a universe.

Now we’re using here… this is the scale of… this is your… your case numbers on SOP Issue Three, your case numbers. Now what’s six? Six is not sure-body and seven is no body.

And that universe itself might be very strangely constructed. You’re not even vaguely interested in how that universe is really constructed, only insofar as how that structure has been knocked to pieces and its functions disrupted by an agreement level of which you have a very adequate track.

I’m drawing it over here. Just above that we have this condition: uh… the person is well oriented at X. That would be uh… figure four here. That would be a one, he’s… he’s… he’s well collected at that point. And here we’ve gotten a sort of a general sight on things, not too good; we’re getting down there. And he’s somewhere in here, and we get down from that into this kind of a thing. Now that’s all very well; he’s somewhere in here.

So deal with certainties, not with uncertainties. Be sure that you’re sure and operate. That doesn’t mean that you have to have 100% absolute certainty in order to operate, just take the one that comes closest to it in your estimation and work with it. If you knew eight techniques, let’s say, and you were darn certain of technique two, you would do much better to take this technique two and operate with it than you would be to try to operate with all eight.

But these points aren’t in sight. He’s occluded. He guesses there’s some points over there someplace. He just assumes it.

You know, I ran into a fellow one time who was learning how to play the piccolo. And he was playing piccolo for the band. And he was just learning how to play this piccolo and I kept hearing this excruciating noise. It would go on all evening. So I found this fellow who was making this noise, and he was making this noise with his piccolo and what was he doing? All evening long he would hold one note until he was absolutely sure of that note. And he was sooner or later then going to be absolutely sure of every note on that piccolo. And he got to be a pretty good piccolo player. That’s kind of cautious!

Now if you want this in terms of attention units we’ll put bursts of attention units up here along the one, three, six, we’ll put… he looks like that here, around one.

A lot of the difference between speeds in people is that some people have more certainties than others. Two people can get to the same goal really at different times – one simply holds onto his certainties and examines them longer than another.

Here we have… he would be uh… slightly like that, about three, and he would be collected in sight with everything smashing in at him about six. And then here he’d be leaving. You get the idea? The guy’s dispersing around in space, that’s all I’m trying to show you. And you’ve got to get this fellow collected from six up to one.

Now a person who’s trying to succumb will take the most uncertain data he has and use that. He’ll use that for all of his thinking processes and everything else. When he gets so far down the tone scale anything that has got an uncertainty principle to it, he’ll use. He won’t use any certainties.

It isn’t… it isn’t a matter of running flows or dichotomies. You can get him out on responsibility any time you want to. Joy of responsibility, beautiful sadness of responsibility, joy of irresponsibility and that sort of thing. On brackets you can get him out any tune you want to if you want to work that long enough. He’ll eventually get there working with flows and… or mock-ups or anything you want to work with, you eventually get there with a case. You know what responsibility is.

You as an auditor just reverse the process and you’ll bring him up tone scale. That’s why these people float around with maybes all the time. They’d actually rather have a maybe than a certainty. And you start him going up the tone scale and you’re just finding more and more certainties.

But here we have a case which is a… a big point. He can cover an area. He isn’t just a single point, he can sort of cover and pervade an area. That has contracted down as we go down to the two and has become a negative position by the time we get to three, four and five, and, boy, he… he’s just… he just knows he’s got no point when he’s at five – he just knows. He’ll be chased out of any place he goes into. He has, by the way, this… this funny feeling.

This… this raving psychotic may be confronting you if you’re unfortunate enough to process psychotics and uh… uh… these techniques work on them. But uh… here… here he… he is… he’s raving around about this and raving around about that, and he appears to be quite certain.

He walks into a strange restaurant or something of the sort; he may be very self-possessed, educated and he… he’s educated himself into that, very self-possessed. He’ll go into the restaurant and uh… so forth, but if the head waiter and so forth looks at him sort of strangely, he just exactly knows what the head waiter’s going to say. The head waiter’s going to turn around to him and say, „Get out.“ He knows that; he knows any time he goes into a strange place he’s going to be kicked out. He has 8 million dollars in cash in his pocket. He has a… a… a local army called the Police Force of Podunk Falls solely in his pay and he goes over into Squeedunk Falls and he knows that when he walks into the main station at Squeedunk Falls that the station master’s going to say to him, „Get out.“ He knows at this moment he will have to flee.

Lord knows he may be apathetic about it or wild enough about it, but if you question him even vaguely about this thing, you… you shake up what little certainty he’s been able to accomplish on this terrific uncertainty in which he’s sitting. He’s not even certain of anything, truth is.

His havingness, his terrific havingness, is a substitute for having any space. Cause havingness is the bottom of the scale and space is the top of the scale, and when a man’s got to have, he’s telling you he has no space. His space is condensing, and condensed space and that sort of thing is objects. He’s got to carry space around in packages on the theory that maybe some day he can uncondense it. So he gets objects, he gets Rolls Royces and blondes.

Well, the wrong way to treat him is to challenge what he’s got because he’s really got what’s to him a pretty good level of certainty. But he will go away from any big certainty because he’s headed down scale toward MEST and the mostest you can say about MEST is maybe.

Or if he isn’t in that category, he keeps things in his desk drawers. Wife goes out every once in a while and cleans out the tool shed. There’s… the newspapers from eight years back are in there and everything is in there and there’s everything in there, and there’s all this… this… there’s this little gimmick that he took off that something or other there that he was making and he knows he’ll have a use for it someday, and that’s in there and it’s got kind of dusty, and then there’s the dead rat that uh… ha was going to frame, and… All this stuff there, he’s just got to have this condensed space around someplace, because someday he’ll uncondense it, he thinks. Gives him points of origin – that’s what he’s looking for. He’s getting… looking for anchor points, somehow or other, he’s got to have some anchor points. And he can… he can uncondense this any time he wants to, as everybody knows.

MEST is plus-negative and in confusion and chaos. And so it’s the big… biggest maybe there is, is MEST. So let’s go up scale with this psycho and let’s find out the least thing of which he can be certain, with confidence and complete certainty, and it will break a maybe.

So, the preclear you will find amongst homo sapiens starts in as being perhaps larger than a point to himself. This isn’t any past body. He’s very relaxed about it. But if you found anybody very much larger than a point, he would not be in Mr. Homo Sapiens. He would be standing around outside leaning up against the lamp post once in a while, saying to homo sapiens that he is allegedly running, „Okay, Joe, why don’t you go over and have a beer?“

And you can just… if you follow that principle, not running engrams or anything else, but just follow that principle as a general operating principle with psychotics, you’ll watch cases breaking with psychotics – bong, bong, bong.

„Yeah, that’s right, that’s a good thing to do. Ah, to hell with him.“

I haven’t any uh… qualms much about treating them. I hate to advise auditors to treat them for the good reason that psychotics are very hard to re… they’re quite restimulative when you approach them in a body. You can approach them without a body, just take your perceptic band off and just let it go through, don’t put up screens. That just builds up a stop and you get glee of insanity all over it. Horrible stuff.

He would really be uninterested because he hasn’t gotten too concerned yet. Now by the time he’s collected down to a point he’s getting kind of concerned, and by the time he’s getting down any lower than that, of course, it’s a negative point.

Well, anyway, you take him up scale in certainties. If you have a raving psychotic you can at last say, you can at last say to him, he can recognize a MEST object, or he can recognize you, or he can recognize a window catch. You can just say to him sometime, „Is there anything in this room that is real to you?“

What’s a negative point? It’s a point that a dimension goes through. A point is a dimension going through it. A point should have no space and no dimension. This fellow… this fellow has to drive five miles forward to back up one step. You get the idea. In order to go to plus Y on a three plane dimensional scale uh… in order to go to a plus Y uh… at all, he’s probably got to back up along minus Y for eight yards and then he thinks he’ll get the plus Y.

„No.“ Yeah, no.

And, what do you know, that person acts like that in his behavior; he acts like that. He has a split instant where he has the impulse to go the wrong way and then he tells himself to go the right way. When he starts to turn a corner, if you’ll just watch his hands for an instant you’ll find out that his hands are starting to turn the car the other way. And then he’ll turn them back again to make them turn the right way. Yeah, he’ll… he’ll… he’ll do that, it’s flick. Well, that fellow has got to… got to back up a long distance to go forward an inch, and he’s got to… he, see, he collects space, anchor points, uncertainty. What’s reaction time? What’s motion? What are all these things, comes under the heading of space. Origin points in space.

What you’ve done is make him hold on to two new anchor points, and then post something in the room. And he’ll all of a sudden look around and he’ll say, „The light switch… the light switch, yeah, that’s really a light switch.“ Now he can go from there to „That’s a window. That’s a washstand. This is a bed. That’s a floor.“ Don’t think he’s just chattering. This guy is in momentary ecstasy of certainties.

Your process on this is to mock up spaces. And fill them full and empty them. And fill them full and empty them. And then put lots of things in them and then throw things away and then have things coming out of the anchor points and going away. And then reaching through all of this area of space and being in this area of space and coloring this area of space in various ways. And reaching through the area of space. And then mocking up anchor points that he would like to have. How would you like to orient yourself, Bill? What would you like to have out there to get you to really know you were there? Now don’t try to chase this back by symbolism.

You’ve managed to direct his attention just enough up level to let him find and locate – what? An object by anchor point coordinates. And you just let him locate himself. And he’ll locate himself; he’ll find his hands, and his legs, and stuff like that. He’ll locate himself. He’ll get himself right back into present time, if you don’t suddenly think you have to get fancy and if you don’t think you have to get more learned that that. Really there’s nothing more learned to know about psychotics.

I wrote a foul and evil book once upon a time. Was called THE KEY TO THE UNCONSCIOUS. It ties back mock-up processing into reality. It turns out that that’s the meanest thing an auditor can do. You can do a lot of things with this, but if you use it too long it will give the guy the idea that his dreams are all based on reality.

Because you have to give them reality. What’s reality? You have to get them back into some sort of an agreement with something because they’re out of agreement with everything. You can even get a psychotic over, by the way, into his own universe, or you can get him into an agreement with you.

And that is the primary sin of psychoanalysis. They say, „You can’t have your universe, you poor fool, we’re just uh… helping you now. Let’s see, now think of something else. Oh, that’s because you drowned your grandmother’s kittens. Yes. Oh, you think that’s yours, eh? Well, that isn’t yours, this happy little dream you’re having about, uh… yeah, that depends upon something in the real universe. You’re really agreeing after all. You thought you were trying to get away and disagree and we look it all over and we find out that you were only agreeing.“

One of the oddest ways to get a psychotic over something is to get him into an agreement that something is what it isn’t. Don’t just keep agreeing with his… his… he says… he says, „That’s a hobbyhorse,“ and it’s obviously the windmill and so forth. Direct his attention someplace else; he’s got an identification on that windmill and he’s giving you the wrong name for it.

„Now you say that when you go to sleep at night you have a dream. Now you think you’re free when you dream, don’t you? But you’re really agreeing with the physical universe. Yes, now that will be 185 for this week’s work and that will be 8,000 for next month’s work. And a complete psychoanalysis takes about a year to find out if we can do anything for you and it takes another year to do anything for you and then of course we can’t guarantee that anything will be done for you and that will only cost at average rates in the United States for four appointments a week, of one hour each, 9,450. And that is the cost of doing nothing for you but making you into MEST, brother.“

Get him over, mock him up an illusion, say „Do you see this little man, no, no, do you see this little man here?“ The guy will mock up a little man there for you, see? Maybe he’ll look at the one you’re mocking up and uh… he’s liable to say, „Yeah, yeah, I see that little man.“ Now you’d think you were leading him right straight off into hallucination and delusion; that wouldn’t be the case at all.

And how is this done? Simply by pointing out to somebody that everything he thinks of has an origin in the MEST universe. He has no independent capacity to dream. And for heaven’s sakes you don’t… you’re using mock-up processing, please learn this as one of the important points: never wonder what caused the fellow to think that up, because at first there’ll be a little impulse for the things he thinks up to be modified by the MEST universe. But, if you don’t challenge him, he’ll go free. Last night we had some demonstrations here. We had a preclear who couldn’t tell me a lie. That was interesting, isn’t it? He couldn’t say there was an airplane just flew in the window. Fascinating. Why? The MEST universe has kept saying to him over and over and over and over, „Look, you’ve got to agree with me.“ And agreement with the MEST universe is the equivalent of, similar to, and is the same as punishment. And there isn’t much difference between the two.

You say, „All right, do you see the little man jump?“

So, unless he agrees, he’ll be punished. Unless he says what the MEST universe tells him to say, he’ll be punished. So any operation in mock-up processing which tries to convince the preclear that what he has just mocked up has symbolical purpose in the MEST universe is an overt act and is black magic, operating to reduce the self-determinism of the preclear.

„Sure.“ Yeah, he’ll agree with you, yeah. You’ve got a point of agreement. Takes two to make some universe like this one.

He keeps mocking up a broom handle. „All right,“ he says, „I’ll take this broom handle and I go this-a-way with it and I… I… I got a broom handle here“ and so on.

Now, what is a datum? Logic four, a datum is a facsimile of states of being, states of not being, actions or inactions, conclusions or suppositions in the physical or any other universe. Too wide, a little bit too wide a definition. Let’s modify that definition by this: It’s a datum resulting from a postulate.

And you say, you know, to yourself, you know, „What he’s really mocking up… what he really is mocking up is a… is a pressor beam. And he’s afraid of pressor beams; he’s afraid they’ll collapse, so he’s got something solid like a broom handle that he’s monkeying around with there.“

We’ve got a postulate, you know, up in the Q’s. Now let’s just say a datum is something that results from a postulate; can be an idea, a thought, or anything else. We don’t have to put that in terms of energy, because postulates are things that govern a large order of activity and any part of that order of thought or activity could be a datum, couldn’t it? And it does not have to be stated that it is engraved upon energy and that is the definition of a facsimile.

Well, you know that. But that’s all right, what the heck? Don’t point out to him that he’s mocking up pressor beams. Let him get a bigger and better broom handle. He’ll find out sooner or later that he’s mocking up pressor beams, but let him find that out. Then if he wants to mock up something else he can have zing-zag broom handles or something and get away from it. But the essence of it is to let him know he is doing it and that it is his. Not that it is related to the MEST universe.

It’s not engraved upon energy. This is true for this universe but it is not true for all universes. What’s a datum? A datum is anything which proceeds from a postulate. You say this room is yellow throughout. You made a postulate. You’ve said a postulate – you’ve already said there is a room, space, coordinates, location and so forth – is yellow throughout and uh… now we get a datum, that wall is yellow. That’s a datum. Uh… those walls are so far apart, and so on. You see you’re… you’re making comments and classifications and gradient scale data proceeding out of basic data. Very… it’s a good way of looking at it. None of these terms are absolute.

He only has one area to get out and that is CERTAINTY and his only real certainty he’s going to be able to get is the certainty that he himself has his own illusions. And he gets that certainty, goes up the line of knowingness; if you keep showing him that THAT certainty really was the MEST universe and was not a certainty at all, you’re going to knock him on down tone scale and out through the bottom.

All right, five, a definition of terms is necessary to the alignment, statement, resolution, of suppositions, observations, problems, and solutions and their communications. Here’s a whole matter of definition. Definition is taken up so beautifully and expertly by Count Alfred Korzybski that it is very difficult to improve in any way upon his classifications of definitions or his understanding of definitions.

You’ll make MEST out of him because he’s saying you can’t locate anything in space. Look, it’s still the MEST universe located in space with you, fellow. I’m… I’m sorry to have to digress and give you this… this technical discussion on psychoanalysis.

Somebody said it a little shorter than Korzybski, uh… Voltaire – if you would argue with me, define your terms, and uh… Korzybski is speaking in the main about this universe, he’s using that reference point, and he is in the main working in an effort to gain a therapy which he never gains. The therapy intended in General Semantics, it would be the therapy resulting from any education, but an enforced discipline of forcing people to stop and think for a moment about this and that just to communicate better, puts a stop on the line. So it isn’t a therapy; it’s educational in its therapy level. It is not a process or a therapy which they tried to make of it and which it failed on.

I have used psychoanalysis, by the way. I have the edge on people in psychoanalysis who have things to say anything about Scientology. I know their subject – they don’t.

But it was too bad that they did that because it is what it is… it’s uh… a dissertation and a very wonderful piece of work on the subject of definition. But we put down here… this is not particularly an agreement or disagreement with that. I don’t think Korzybski himself would disagree with these. He might even have a little fun with them.

Now, we have, then, the whole principle of spacation outlined under the heading of anchor points, and origin points. There’d be the preclear’s origin point. There would be an understood anchor point which he somehow or other somewhere has consented to. That would be anchor point understood but not located, or origin point understood… better change that around, call it origin point unknown, but understood. And then there’d be the origin point which he conceives to be himself. That would be, according to him, a secondary origin point. He thinks of himself as a secondary origin point. He’s an origin point being located by the first unknown origin point. Therein lies his aberration.

Definition, a descriptive definition is one which classifies by characteristics by describing existing states of being. That would mean this is a table. Uh… this is a table. Uh… it has a flat top. And uh… it has uh… legs. And uh… it sits on things. Of course, that also… that also describes numerous things. That’s a descriptive definition, but that’s true of any descriptive definition that after you’ve described and described and described why, you still don’t have any great clarity on the thing. Even if you take a drawing of a rhinoceros you’re liable to get a unicorn.

Now he is an origin point, then, and as an origin point he can clearly be an origin point as long as he has a good solid assignment to anchor points. Your preclear needs anchor points to find himself oriented.

Uh… the descriptive definition is very limited. A differentiative definition is one which compares unlikeness to existing states of being or not being. We say this is a table. Why is it a table? It is not a chair. Why is it a table? It is not a box. Why is it not a box? A box has no legs.

Now, the only way he could really, really be sure of anchor points is to mock them up. He can’t guarantee that this is the MEST universe, this MEST universe is real, but he could guarantee that he himself had mocked up real anchor points. That would really be real anchor points, but in this universe you will find out that his earliest decided upon anchor points are really postulates. They’re heavy ones. He’s made them day after day after day.

And we could say this has legs and a box doesn’t have legs, therefore it’s not a box. And we keep saying what this is not. The most wonderful fellow in the world on this is the German. The German can go on with this and on and on and on with this, of describing something by saying what it is not.

„Well, I’m getting home now. There’s Mrs. uh… Marsha’s house. Oh, here I am at the corner.“ How often you’ve said that; have to say good night now. „I’m at THE corner.“ If he could only know what he really felt down underneath about the corner, and if he were to say to himself or think to himself, „Someday there isn’t going to be any corner anywhere in reach of me at all,“ he’d get the funniest sensation. „Someday I won’t be able to walk to this corner.“ And in that whole subject lies nostalgia.

And actually there’s a system of Germanic logic which runs like this: it is not, it is not, it is not, and it can t, it can t, it can’t. They’ve proven those points and then they simply assume this about it. That’s a gorgeous piece of… piece of logic. They say it… it… it isn’t and it isn’t and it isn’t and it can’t and it can’t and it can’t and they’ve described what it isn’t like and what its disabilities are, and then they they say that’s all that’s left. And you say woooo.

You’re gonna get… you can actually blow grief on this – nostalgia. Nostalgia goes back anchor points; you can get nostalgia on anchor points one, two and three up to maybe anchor points uh… nineteen, twenty and twenty-one, and after that don’t bother to get any nostalgia, because the guy has given up about that time having any anchor points.

They… they’ve just got through assuming with typical Teutonic conceit that they have just exhausted all possibilities here. They… they’ve insisted that they’ve exhausted all possibilities of unlikeness and inability and therefore conclude an ability. And Germanic philosophy is full of this sort of thing. My God, if you do that you can prove one equals zero and two equals ten and that one over the square root is the acceleration of gravity. You can prove anything if you do that.

And if he’s gone up to a set of what did we have here, same here as the Battle of Hastings, more or less. Boy, that was a fight. Uh… A-1066, uh… if you get up to a thousand anchor points this guy’s had… he’s now at anchor point 1,000, 1,001, and 1002 or something like that. Oh, no. This is just… his life is just a blur. It’s just a vague blur to him. You can go back and he will locate in terms of objects.

So an associative definition is one which declares a likeness to existing states of being or not being. So you say that’s a table, it’s pretty well like a… it’s like a… well, it’s like a big table and uh… it’s like a chair except it’s not so high as a chair and a chair has a back, and so on, just go on like that. Now an action definition would be one which delineates cause and potential change of state of being by cause of existence, inexistence, action, inaction, purpose or lack of purpose. And that’s very interesting. Although it sounds sort of garbled as you read it there.

So if you want to put a guy’s time track back together for any reason or other, put it together in terms of objects instead of energies, because he’s low enough on the tone scale so all he can actually locate is objects not motions, ordinarily, if he’s in that shape.

Boil it down to this, boil it down to this. What that thing’s trying to say is simply this: here, here we have the classifications of insanity of Kraepelin. It’s actually Crap-lin but I… audiences snicker when I say that, for some reason or other. He worked an awful lot, long ago, and he made this terrific classification of psychotic states.

Now things won’t be in motion for this guy, for this preclear; he won’t see things in motion, things won’t be in motion for him, he’ll have a hard time making anything move. That’s merely because he hasn’t any solid anchor points. How can you make anything move if you haven’t got anchor points? It’s impossible, naturally.

The Germans are morbidly interested in this sort of thing. And he goes on and on and on and on and on; he says there’s this state and that state and there’s this state and that state and this state and that state and woah rah, page after page after page. And then finally, having exhausted all states and having said so, he gets to the last classification and he says all other classifications are unclassified and so fall here.

What is a terminal? A terminal is an anchor point. What are the terminals of an electric motor? The terminals of an electric motor are the anchor points from which motion can emanate. The principle of the manufacture of electricity has to do with the shift of the point of origin between the anchor points of an electric motor. With this principle, could we work out a new, good and usable electric motor? Yes, we could.

This is the most gorgeous, by the way, piece of classification that has ever been done. And it hasn’t any use. Its level of use is demonstrated by the fact that there’s a place by the name of Walnut Lodge. I… I… They don’t see anything humorous in that, by the way; it’s Walnut Lodge. And that’s a spinbin down the line here. And uh… Walnut Lodge has… has… treats only… only uh… psychiat… oh uh… pardon me I… I said that accidentally, not as a gag, uh… uh… not as a gag.

For the first time we could have an electric motor. That’s all due respect to General Electric. That’s a good outfit, General Electric, actually. I never appreciated American electrical equipment till the last few months and uh… two-twenty A.C. is gaps all the time and they have to have the most fantastically wide plug-ins. At a hundred and ten, A.C. is pretty good, that doesn’t close the gap; that doesn’t have to be very heavily insulated on a hundred and ten.

They… they… they sent three people to see, to… to see me and every one of them was under treatment. And this was their staff. But anyway, very good people there, I’m sure, didn’t happen to meet any. Have some fine patients though. Anyway, they… they treat only schizophrenia. And so they take only schizophrenics. Now how do they get only schizophrenics? Well, anybody sent to Walnut Lodge is a classified schizophrenic. And they take somebody who is a dementia praecox unclassified or a more modern definition, a mania-depressive and they take him from Saint Elizabeth’s and they take him over to Walnut Lodge and he goes onto the books as a schizophrenic.

But if you were to put two-twenty on a hundred and ten plugs and fitting and lines and that sort of thing, you’d get quite a fuss, so the British believe that our electrical equipment isn’t any good. And we believe that the British electrical equipment is far too heavy. And we forget that the difference of voltage is so wide.

Why? Because Walnut Lodge takes only schizophrenics. Now you can look at them and you say, „Now wait a minute, let’s go over this awfully slow,“ you say, „What’s a schizophrenic?“

Well, anyway, actually the British manufacture electricity far cheaper than anybody else. I don’t know whether this is… has something to do with having a higher power to go over the lines or less line loss or something of the sort. But uh… the point is that when you deal with any kind of terminals you can get a nice sparky current, nice juice, good hot juice. If you got a terminal one, the terminal here, whether it’s made by… in Great Britain or in the United States or on the planet Gandalupia…

„A schizophrenic? We take schizophrenics here.“

You got two terminals… and a base to keep them apart or a will to keep them apart, will, postulates, base, no real difference. Uh… you’ve got location, and where you have location you can have motion, and where you can have motion you can have life, life forms. You can have action, you can have objects, you can have all of these things. And they all come out sort of on the course of the horseshoe nail, straight through.

You say, „No, no, no, what is a schizophrenic?“

They all come out from that one line, origin point, unknown and understood, origin point, preclear, anchor points. When you’ve got that together you have the complex terminal set-up necessary to produce a high- level energy flows and the phenomena which you see here in the MEST universe and which you call electricity and which on a much higher level, causing the electricity, human thought. This is not a very mechanistic approach, by the way. This is highly esoteric as an approach, because, what do you know, you keep postulating this and you’ve agreed with everybody, you’re trained in viewing anchor points, you’re all set. You’re… you’ve done all this. You’ve gone through all this and you… you’ve… after you got trained to produce anchor points and you produced… you had envisioned good ones.

„You know what a schizophrenic is,“ they say, „a schizophrenic is a general type of insanity and so when we take schizophrenics here that ends the whole thing.“

You could put motion into them and you assisted motion all over the place, and you have produced lots of action for yourself there. And… gee, life was running fast and so forth, and eventually people started to disagree with you and you lost those anchor points and… and other things happened and you weren’t supposed to use force anymore which is to say it isn’t your space, same thing.

Actually, the modern definition of schizophrenia… actually the American psychiatrist does not define schizophrenia from its root word of shizoid or schizoid, meaning scissors-like, and it means a split personality. And you think that a schizophrenic today is a split personality person? That’s not true. It hasn’t anything to do with… it’s… I don’t know, I don’t know what it is. I go around and I get these guys and I hold them against the wall and I say, „Now look, what… what is this?“

Uh… you ever notice dogs when they run into a… a neighbor dog’s yard? They really cool down. It isn’t their space anymore. Well, they can’t go into motion like that, but they go back in their own yards again and some Pekingese goes into his own front yard – there’s nothing more savage than a Pekingese in his own front yard. Mastiff comes in there and he says, „Excuse me,“ and he walks out. That’s own space.

And they say, „Well, uh… we had to go to school for twelve…“

All right, all this subject comes down to – you… you’re actually producing that motion, you’re producing an agreement with an awful lot of people, you go on producing it and what do you know, you reach over all the time and keep planting emotion into things, so that you can perceive emotion.

„Well, wai… wai… wait a minute now. All I want is a common English definition or a Latin definition or even put it in Sanskrit. I can find a translator, but I want you to tell me what so and so is or why.“ And you get the most… it’s… it’s just A=A=A=A explanations.

You not only put the motion there but you put the e… emotion there and perceive the emotion out of it continually. And you want it all to be automatic, and you want sensation like mad, so you just skip that step every time. You skip the step of a postulation of space, and then you skip the step of a postulation of motion, and then you skip the step of postulation of placing energy there to emanate back at you again, all because you want the sensation to effect you.

Well, he rowed a horse because he rode a horse and that’s on down the line – no sense. You get that way by treating psychotics. Don’t ever treat psychotics.

You want all this to make an effect out of you, because you want sensation from it, so you just skip these steps and you’re all set. Except you wind up aberrated and homo sapiens.

Anyway, this action definition merely tries to state, then, that the definition of something should lead to putting it into action or remedying it. You say schizophrenia. Here’s an action definition of schizophrenia which you might apply. This isn’t the definition of schizophrenia, nobody can find that. It’s buried in the archives of the Library of Congress or something.

Let’s take another break.

It’s… schizophrenia is an idea that one is two persons, which is remediable by the discovery of the life continuums being dramatized by the individual. And that would be an action definition and when you’re defining things, particularly in Scientology, I wish you’d remember that. Define it by what it does or its cure. Don’t define it by what it is like or what it’s unlike or anything. Somebody says to you, „What’s an engram?“ Well, we have a technical definition which is a moment of pain and unconsciousness. That’s all right but that is not an action definition. That is a descriptive definition and so far is limited in use.

So it’s the best… a clumsy way to define it but nevertheless a better way to define it, even if you say it this way, „An action definition of an engram is a moment of pain and unconsciousness which has content, perceptic content, which has command value on the individual and which when reduced brings a greater state of self-determinism to that individual.“

Or you could define it this way, „An engram is a moment of pain or unconsciousness which can be erased by continuous repetition of its phrases and perceptions as though at the moment it occurred.“

You see the reason I’m telling you this is a very interesting reason, that is the way you keep knowledge from being lost. The way to lose knowledge is to use descriptive definitions, associative definitions. It’s all very wonderful to say, that chair is like a hooblagobla. And it comes into a society which doesn’t have a hooblagobla. And then the information is then lost.

A chair is a four-legged object on which one sits and which is constructed by four legs, a seat, and a back, normally of wood. That tells them how to build it. Gives them some idea of how you build a chair.

And when you’re defining Scientology or you’re writing it down, please remember what I say on that. Give them as much of what you do to cause or cause an effect on this thing you’re defining in the definition as you can and still be brief… get an action definition. I do not know but what the concept of action definition is new – I don’t know this. It might not be, uh… but it… it certainly… it’s certainly something I’ve never before seen stressed in the field of philosophy.

Uh… what is an action definition? Action definition is something which gives the remedy or which gives the method of use or construction. All right, you have to learn how to think in those terms by the way. You ought to have this stuff so that you can deliver it, so that you can can remember it without any textbook or anything else, so you can put it all back together again.

This is essentially learning how to think with it. And it’s much more important to know how to think with it than it is to quote it. Very much more important, that’s why I seem to labor some points, and so forth. It’s… it’s just I want them punched up good and hard so that the evaluation line on the thing, if you… if you, all of a sudden one day, if you don’t know this… this subject well, all of a sudden one day you’ll be walking down the street and you, orienting, and all of a sudden whirr click, and the knowledge is yours and you’ve got it in mind and you can suddenly think with it and there’s no strain on it at all. And that’s… that’s just, after that, it’s very easy, very easy.

One of the best auditors over in England said, „Well, I finally uh… finally got it fixed in my mind one day that anything which didn’t consist of an optimum motion was an aberration and after that I understood the whole thing and it’s very easy.“ I don’t know if – that doesn’t get home to me, does it get home to you?

But he… he just told me this in his level of communication. Since that he’s been a wonderful auditor, everything going along fine. I don’t know what he got… what he got into the light, but something went click and after that the preclears are just coming off of an assembly line, click, click, click, click, click, click, click.

Now, all of the early logics then really boil down to the fact that you have a non-wavelength thing called theta which is capable of creating space, time, and locating matter and energy in it, and that uh… there are various things you can do, and at this time the mostest we know you can do with great ease is to make postulates and postulates are a statement of states of being which then go into effect, or don’t go into effect, as the case may be. And proceeding from postulates are bodies of knowledge and data.

And knowing how to know is being free enough to be able to make postulates which will stick or not stick as the case may be, as you desire it.

Let’s take a break.