The first things which put in their appearance for admiration will be bad things because those things persist. The bad things persist, that is, the nonadmired qualities persist.

But let's get that very clear right there as an important datum, A mock-up is an object. It is an item. It exists at a finite distance from the preclear. It is of a finite size, It has an identity and it has a location in space and time. You can actually mock up in the past, the present or the future. You want the mock-ups in the present or in the future, not in the past, really.

So you ask a child to do a mock-up of arithmetic and you get a mock-up, but if you were to look at that mock-up yourself, you would find out it was a nonadmired mock-up. That is to say, he's mocked himself up doing arithmetic, ink up to the elbows and all drugged up and kept in and so forth. And now, if you were to tell him, "Now admire that facsimile" - or "admire that mock-up. Now admire it."

But in Self Analysis, to be on the safe side, we mock it all up past tense. That will run out the whole track. That's because it hits the people who are sure they only have mock-ups in the past, they only have terminals in the past They know they've got a past, so they can put a mock-up in the past.

"Yeah."

You will find, gradually, if you were looking into their minds, their mock-ups would drift first in the past, in the past, in the past, and then they would drift forward into present, a little more into the present. The next thing you know, they would be having mock-ups right up here, you see, right here in the room with them. And then the next thing you know, they'd kind of be mocking into the future and into their own space.

"All right. Now get another mock-up of you doing arithmetic."

But each time that mock-up has a finite location in space and time. It, at its optimum, is a three or more dimensional picture in full color, sound, motion and with all other perceptics present, and with a solidity one could perceive as superior to the solidity which he perceives to exist in the MEST universe. That one is an optimum mock-up.

"Mm, mm-hm. Yeah. This is worse."

And a really optimum mock-up would be all those things, and have a persistence such that it would stay there after you had mocked it up and go on acting of its own volition, and other people would see it. Now, that would be a mock-up to end all mock-ups. All right.

"Now admire that."

Then we're dealing with a specific object, an item and thing here when we're dealing with a mock-up. We're not dealing with just an idea, pictures, something of the sort.

"Mm. Hm. Yeah."

You'll find out from individual to individual there's tremendous variation, tremendous behavior. One of them mocks something up and it goes off erratically and does this and that and other things, and he doesn't control it at all. Well, the trick is to get the mock-up as good as possible and under as full and analytical control as possible with the least possible use of energy. Now, you want - you want this mock-up under full control, you want it in a specific position, you want the person to be able to move it, place it, so on.

"All right. Now get another mock-up of you doing arithmetic."

You'll find out most people, wog people have mock-ups which are two-dimensional; they're flat and gray, or they're mocking up in black space, or they're doing this with the mock-up or doing that with the mock-up. Well, fortunately we can change the characteristics of a mock-up now as easy as you can change your hat. Let it sink in for a moment. Just because people get these various mock-ups is no reason they can't be changed in characteristic. A mock-up's characteristics can be changed almost at will by an auditor, simply by getting the preclear to admire the imperfections.

"Yeah."

"Get a mock-up." "Got it?" "All right," "What's wrong with it?" "Admire that," A fellow getting a mock-up in black space - "Admire that blackness." A fellow getting a mock-up - he can mock up women, but he never gets a woman with a face - "Admire that fact she doesn't have a face." Admire that facelessness, and faces will appear. And in such a way by admiring these imperfections, you can monitor and change the quality of mock-ups at will.

"Now admire that."

Now, to remedy blackness on a mock-up - blackness means just blackness. Actually, it'll appear to be something that people think something was in blackness, because blackness is so capable of having something in it. And they don't know for sure, so they just guess there is something in it. It's safer to have something in it than to doubt it has something in it, so we'll put something in it, so we'll say there's a blackness exists. Sometimes you'll get blackness flowing away from an individual, and it'll flow and flow and flow and flow and flow. There's no flow of blackness, but it'll flow anyway.

"Oh, yes."

Now, we get to people who are admiring how black it all is, and the darnedest things will occur to that blackness. Now, there's another method of remedying that, and that is to run what we call a bracket dichotomy on it, because preventing admiration, preventing admiration is black. When you see blackness, you know admiration is prevented.

You're bringing him up the line on it. It'll be a little slower than that, but you're getting - the bad, nonadmired qualities are appearing. Some preclears in Mock-up Processing always get the bad ones first, Oh, it's just gruesome if you just let them run.

The second that somebody tells you, "Look, I've got a lot of blackness," you say to yourself right there this fellow is present - preventing admiration, not only in the past but in present time. How's he doing it? Who cares. All he has to do, if you're running him on flows, is get him to prevent admiration from flowing. Just do that.

Now, in the Creative Admiration Processing which we have yet to cover, we'll cover this theory. But let it suffice that evaluation of the goodness or badness of the mock-up to be gained is bad on the part of the Group Auditor. He says, "Now get yourself doing well in arithmetic." You see, he's evaluated, and the auditor never evaluates.

Just ask him, "Now, let's get the idea of preventing the admiration from flowing," "Preventing something from being admired. That's right," "Now protect something from admiration," "Now hide something so it won't be admired," This is subzero Tone Scale, bracket dichotomy, That's Professional Course stuff. I'm just giving it to you at this point, but there's other ways of handling this.

There are two shuns: he never evaluates or invalidates a preclear, So he doesn't evaluate with this mock-up beyond this point: He says, "Get a time when you enjoyed something."

The next thing you know, everything will turn blazingly white on him and practically knock his block off. And he'll say, "Gee-whiz, there's - there's ... There - there - there's - there's dogs, and there there's - there's my dog, Bingo. And - and there's this one and there's that one and there's Papa and there's Mama and there's - there's my schoolteacher and there's this one and, gee! How did all these people get here?"

Now, he's getting a time when he enjoyed spinach, you know-grim, terrible. Every time you ask him to get some - you can count on this - you ask him to get something he enjoyed, he's going to get the time when he won the prize and was very sorry because the other boy cried because he hadn't won the prize.

And you say, "Now, we're not interested in that. Just get a mock-up there, and prevent it from being admired,"

You get the veteran, you say, "All right. Get a time when you enjoyed something," and the veteran gets the time when he was standing there in line, he was all clean, spick-and-span, everything was in fine condition. But it did result in the fact that the captain that did admire him during that inspection was killed in action the next week. I mean, he's immediately into that. You can almost depend on springing a grief charge if you go into this enjoyed something, enjoyed something, pleasure, pleasure, pleasure - bang, you've got the guy crying. All right. It's a reverse action of the universe. Because what's happening is, is the nonadmired things, the painful things have presented themselves first.

"Now, there's my first wife, my second wife, my third wife, my sixth wife, my eighth wife, Gee!" That's blackness.

Now, what is survival? We've got two levels here we're operating on. Analytical, which is rational, which makes sense. There you're on safe ground. You say, "This is admirable. This is admirable? Yes, yes, that's admirable." Analytically, one knows it and one will continue on that basis.

The second you spot blackness you know somebody is preventing admiration from... Well, when I say preventing admiration from flowing, he's just preventing flowing. So you know he's stuck on the time track. Why? Because to get up to present time on the time track, you've got to unstick a person, and he's going to stick unless he's got some grease. And what's grease? That's admiration.

Well, there's another level all the time right under that, and that is reactive, stimulus-response. And in the stimulus-response bracket everything runs backwards. The nonadmired things are the compulsive things. So that if one has a lot of ambitions, analytically, he's going to carry on and do very well. But if these are reactive ambitions, they are just compulsions and they are going to get him up in bad trouble, because he's going to make sure that he fails every one of them.

He can't get terminals because he hasn't got anything to let terminals flow, and his lack of that particle will keep him from flowing. It's very interesting. Very good manifestation, so on “I”.

The fact that he's succeeding makes him fail and so on. Goes in reverses, There are a lot of characteristics of flows which we don't have to cover at this time. It just - just take it from there that you got a reactive level, which is a stimulus-response, unseen, uncomprehended thing, which forces computations on an individual.

Well, you're not too interested in this as a Group Auditor. But don't get downhearted if you have your class - the can'ts - segregated out and you have to process them.

This analytical level? Sure, up here on the analytical level if you admire something, you want to do this, you know that will happen and so forth. Every once in a while this reactive level intrudes. And what is in the reactive level is unadmired things. They're hanging fire. There is a reactive level because of the missing particle.

Now, don't take just one can't and process him and another can't and process him and another can't and process him. No, no, no, no, no. Don't give him any special attention, because you're denying the rest of the groups and so forth.

Now, if you want to read Book One, you'll find a great deal of information in Book One. It's not controverted nor is it beyond use at this time. It's more than we had at the time. This technique of admiration, just to give you some kind of an idea, solves every problem advanced as a problem in Book One. So we've done a jump here.

Make a group out of the "can'ts" or the "maybe can'ts." Just make a group out of them and then process them for short, brief times. And how do you process them? Well, you process them this way: "All right, now get an idea that there's a mock-up out there."

The Theta Clear was a milestone. Book One was a milestone. Behind that, survive was a milestone - its isolation as a principle of existence. So we hit this other milestone, and when we hit such a button, this button should, perforce, solve all the previous problems. And Book One now solves on Admiration Processing. All you do is get admiration for speech - not selectively, not with evaluation, not admiration for bad speech or good speech, just admiration for talking. Just mock up yourself admiring talking. Just mock up yourself admiring talking, other people admiring you talking. Just mock up talking, And the next thing you know, there will be quite several concussions and somatics and collisions and all sorts of things will happen in the being that shouldn't really happen to a dog, but they will occur, and you've run out the bank. It might take quite a little while before you could do that. But you take any turned-off perceptic on an individual and get him to admire that perceptic unselectively without evaluation - just admire the perceptic. Don't tell him nonselectively, just say, "All right, get 'Admire looking.’ ‘Admire looking.' Got that?"

The guy says, "Just an idea? There - class."

"Oooh, yes, yes. Well, I can't get anything. Yes, well, yeah. I got pain in my eye."

And you say, "Just an idea. Yeah, just an idea there's a mock-up out there someplace."

"Just admire it some more."

"All right. Ah, I get that."

Now, in Book One it said that the most abberative factor was speech. That's true, because you can't see sound, and man counts on sight more than he counts on sound. So here's this aberrative factor: sound gets buried in heavy incidents, gets buried all up and down the bank. What's been said to you, a person - the reactive mind takes it very literally. This is Book One, straight dope, You start admiring speech and you all of a sudden desensitize the aberrative quality of speech by providing the grease to let it fly to its normal terminals and unwind. And the bank just comes to pieces. So you just get admiring talk. That solves Book One.

"All right. Now get the idea of preventing it from being admired." Wham, they'll go right out of their seats.

I'm not telling you how many hours it'll take you, but the test on this was very interesting. Tests: admiration of speech, admiration of talking, men, women, records, talk and admiration of sound and then admiration of the individual. Now, there are easier techniques than this. I'm just telling you that that is not the technique. That is just a technique that solves Book One. Everything that's in Book One is in Book One. It's there and it solves on that basis. So that's the missing particle and that's why all of this speech didn't just suddenly fly out of the bank and leave a fellow Clear. See, you can create a MEST Clear with Admiration Processing, everybody furnishing the grease on that and permitting him to again be analytical about things that are said. And you get a tremendous change in an individual just from that.

This is horrible. Two or three of them are practically going to blow their heads off before you've run this process very long.

Now, the whole society is rigged on a basis of evaluation of good and evil; the mind deals out good and evil, one after the other. Don't think, please, that you have to go around admiring evil. Don't think that you have to become a devil worshiper or something of the sort to reach God. No, don't make that error.

That applies to little children, too. They're preventing admiration. You'll find out in little kids' cases there is - are members of the family who are preventing them from admiring others. "You mustn't admire your father." "You mustn't admire your mother." "You mustn't admire your great-aunt Bessie Leu." And the child doesn't want his mother to be so admiring of his father because it denies him admiration. He's got a scarcity level of admiration already.

There's a level of ethic which is very high on the Tone Scale that takes care of things like this. God and the Devil are arbitrary factors to a large degree. There are gods above gods, there are many gods. And there is a God above all those gods, And I'm afraid that from area to area, the messiah of Africa and the Chinese and so forth, these all these people have different kinds of gods. And there's all kinds of them. And they represent good or they represent evil to that people. They've evaluated, then, what was the function of God. And you will find in primitive society, God is almost always evil. Fascinating, but true.

So we've got these interpersonal situations preventing admiration, which is going on right in present time, and you just have to pull the cork on them and let those flows flow from terminals to terminals, and the case solves. And by the way, the case solves, which is what's interesting. It isn't just the mock-up. Whatever a mock-up won't do or mock up can't do, that person in his life isn't or can't do. There, that's a parallel. A person acts as good as he can mock up. Horribly true.

Evaluation takes it on the highest level, puts it clear up into deity.

Now, the odd part of it is, is the person can have lots of reactive mind and be sitting on top of this with lots of analytical mind. Remind me of a professor one time that was very famous, he - for his temper and so forth. And one of the - he got mad at the class, and one of them came up to him after class and said, "Sir, I wish you'd control your temper a little better."

And deity, as conceived by Homo Sapiens, isn't terribly high. But the admiration for God as practiced, if practiced selectively of the good qualities of God, only leaves you with a devil. I'm sorry about it. (audience laughter)

And he says, "Young man, I will have you know that I control more temper in fifteen minutes than you control in your entire lifetime!"

Now therefore, you have a situation - you have a situation. Whether it's good or bad or not, that's not for us to worry about, but you will have this situation with your people in a group. You will find that some of these people are very, very sold on the "selective admiration of" to such a degree that they really run reverses. You ask them do it - mock up something good and they'll get something bad every time. You ask them to mock up something bad, they get something good. They're just turned backwards. God and the devil both get into the reactive mind. In the analytical mind they're in good shape and everything is fine. But when they sink into the reactive mind and go out of sight and start acting compulsively, you can expect many interesting things to occur. One of the least things that occur is the unknown communication line - mystery and aberrative quality of.

Now, it's sort of that way with the reactive bank and the analytical mind. There's some of these people who just have a horrible reactive bank that they're controlling quite admirably. The only place you really see it reflected in conduct to amount to anything is in their mock-ups. But they're skidding in the direction of that inability.

And you will find many children, and this is particularly true of children, are so puzzled about this, as an evaluation, that they're almost spinning. "God is everywhere" or "The devil will get you" or some such thing as that. And this just means that just literally to the kid, and he goes around in terror. And you see this little boy in your class, and - you know, what's wrong with him? What's wrong? Probably never occurred to you to ask him about God because God is good and it's a good concept. Well, it's gotten into the reactive mind very deeply, and in the reactive mind it's raising the dickens with him. Raising the devil with him, I should say.

Now, a person who is fixed, sort of, he - every mock-up he gets. He'd get a mock-up and then he couldn't move it anywhere. See, he just couldn't move this mock-up.

And a religion on a basis of too far in advance of the understanding, that is, a compulsive level of action on the subject of religion can snarl a child quite badly because he's being told all the time that "This is bad," "This is bad," "This is bad," "This is bad." And he's being given evaluations: The only thing that's bad in the universe is the devil. And if he's riding on top of this computation that everything is bad is the devil and he is bad, he will be himself the devil in an effort to try to run it out, and he will become a thoroughly bad child. He will become almost unmanageable.

By the way, there is a way of moving mock-ups. You move them a little bit and then you move them more. Gradient scale, you see? Do things a little bit and then do them more. And then do them more and more and more, and you get the whole thing going. Control something a tiny bit and then control it more and more and more. There - you can't get rid of this mockup of this man, well, all right, get rid of one hair on his head. And then get rid of two hairs, six, eight, his hair, his head, the man. That's getting rid of the whole mock-up. All right.

That's an interesting point that you should keep in mind, then, that evaluation on the part of the auditor really isn't called for. There's been just a trifle too much. You want to get this person up into an analytical level and have him assess things for himself. This is nothing against religion. Religion can be poured into ears a little too early, though.

Producing a mock-up - can't produce a mock-up with somebody or other? Get something they touched once. Get their handkerchief. Now get a stocking. Now get a shoe. Now get a foot, feet, legs, body, head, mock-up, there it is. Gradient scale, you see. You do a little bit, and do it all.

Now, when you have problems with relationship to children in a group, you will find that they've had too many things evaluated for them; and what is admired and what is not admired has been so laid out and has been pushed in so heavily upon them that they by this time got it all reactively and they'll run backwards. They'll just be backwards. Some little boy in class, you say, "Don't come here" and he'll come here. He just runs in complete reverse. You just try reverse commands on him and he'll act, he's gotten that bad off. So don't evaluate as an auditor.

Now, you can create things in that fashion. But if you just admire their imperfections, you can achieve the same and even a superior result. So we have this in Mock-up Processing as a big bonus right at the present time, here, you see.

The mock-ups will come up pretty well in turn. And if you just tell him mock up mock-ups coming along, you be sure that you're mocking up 50 percent bad or better, because there's the persistence.

Now, your three classifications, then - this kid who was too fast. (snap, snap, snap) Bang, bang! No persistence, you see? He hasn't any persistence at all. There's a nonadmiration of persistence present there, you see? Persistence is what's missing - pardon me, is nonadmiration, nonpersistence. So what you've got, you've got to admire - get him admiring the disappearance of things.

Now, survival tells you what is right is survival. That's analytical. That which is right survives, and that which is wrong dies. That's analytical. It's perfectly true on an analytical level. On a reactive level, it works exactly the opposite direction. It says, "That which persists is wrong," But if something is wrong, it must persist.

It's very easy for you to figure out. Just get him admiring anything he's doing. That's the rule behind this, just anything he's doing. The mock-up disappears too fast, get him admiring that speed of disappearance. And the next thing you know, you'll find out that he's lost more terminals, more things, more homes and so on. Every terminal he ever had in his whole life has a tendency to go out from under and disappear. Boom, boom, boom! It's gone, gone, gone, gone, gone. Next thing you know, he can't get mock-ups. Reason he can't a mock-up, it's paralleling the reactive mind. Mock-up has a lot to with the reactive mind.

Persistence in a child is right, because to survive he has to persist, doesn't he? And then he'll come along and he's raising the devil. And you tell him not to raise the devil, and he persists. And you caution him again, and he persists even more. And then he persists further and further and further and further! Until he's practically out of his mind and so are you. Well, what's happening here? He is defending, reactively, his right to survive. Survival is duration, and he insists that what he is doing must be right because he's really incapable of being wrong, Persistence.

Now this fellow gets a mock-up and he can't get rid of it - nrrrr, nrrrr, nrrrr. He's had no admiration for holding on. People keep telling him, "Now look, you shouldn't hold on, you should get rid of it, you shouldn't hold on to this, you shouldn't hold on to that." He just holds on. And then they say, "We don't admire you." And he holds on. And they say, "We don't admire you." And he gets - then he gets insisting: "Look, I'm going to get some admiration for holding on if it kills me." Years later when you ask him to get a mock-up and he gets a mock-up - and you say, "All right. Now get another mock-up." "Now get a rabbit." "Now get an infantryman." "Now get an airplane." "Yeah," he says, "what do I do with the rabbit?" And you say, "Well, put it away."

Now, you get, mechanically - the absence of the particle admiration on a certain line guarantees that persistence, so you get the persistence of death. And a child will keep on and on and on with something. And then people will stop him, and they will say, "No, no, you mustn't do that" and he does it more. And you say, "No, no, you mustn't do that" and then he does it more.

"Yeah, Ha-ha. It doesn't go anyplace. As a matter of fact, the harder I try to put it away the more it stops right there." What do you do?

What's he think you're telling him? He thinks you're telling him "Die! Die! Die! Don't persist! Don't persist! Don't persist!" And what he's saying with this badness is "Live! Live! Live! I'm going to live!" Because he's got the idea that livingness consists of persistence, that's all.

You admire - get him to admire its persistence. And if it disappears, you get him to admire the way it disappears. Simple. Whatever he's doing, get him to admire it. or it to admire him.

You want to break that line down, just do Creative Processing - not even very thoroughly addressed to the subject - just get him mocking things up, that's all. And get him admiring them and the next thing you know, why it'll blow. He is in the horrible plight of having no admiration anywhere, and he doesn't know he himself can furnish it. By the way, does that hit any cases here personally?

Now, the phenomenon of boil-off is one that's quite important to you. And if you are teaching or processing a class like this and you are lecturing to a class like this and you saw two or three of the students asleep, and if you were really on the ball and you weren't making a tape, you would simply make them get up and turn their chair around. That's all. If you were all to turn your chairs around right now, you'd wake up and go home very fresh. Why? You've got sound flowing into the face of them. That's all. Really, I ought to ask you at this moment to turn around and have - and let the sound fly in the other direction. Because it would, it'd wake you up.

Male voice: Yes.

I think we might as well do that. Why don't - why don't you all turn around, face the other direction. (audience laughter; sounds of moving chairs) All right, now that you're all turned around, I'll finish this lecture.

Female voice: Definitely, yes.

Now, the phenomenon of boil-off is a one-way flow; it's a flow that's been flowing too long in one direction. And you'll find at first a person, when he turns around and flows - gets a flow in the other direction - has a tendency to wake up.

Now, here we have, then, the reactive mind running on a 180-degree wrong vector, just in reverse to what the analytical mind should run. So when we say God and the devil we might as well say the analytical mind and the reactive mind, because one is going to get you in trouble and cease your survival quickly - the reactive mind - and the other mind is going to be very benign and very analytical and figure it all out right. And the two of them get into conflict. Now, you'll run admiration for mock-ups then. Just list some mock-ups, and you'll get your preclear right on up Tone Scale.

Now, this works to a slightly lesser degree than in processing when you go through a program like you've just gone through. You're turned around now. Now you have the sound flowing past you in the opposite direction. It's very possible some of you might feel a little relief on this.

Well now, this manifests itself in terms of boil-off. A person will simply go to sleep on too long a flow. And once in a while if you're processing children or adults, you will find them suddenly falling down across their desk and going out cold.

Well, don't think something horrible has happened. They've just put the mock-up in front of them and in front of them and in front of them and in front of them and in front of them, and they've flowed toward it and flowed toward it and flowed toward it till all of a sudden they went too far on the one-way flow and it knocked them out.

Now what you do is simply turn the mock-up around and put the mock-up behind them. And you put the mock-up behind them and let them put it behind them. This first one they put behind them will brighten them up and give them a tendency to awaken and be brighter and fresher.

So when you see a person getting groggy, you should, as Group Auditor, indicate that person and tell him to put the mock-ups behind him, or just as general practice, you ought to shift the position of mock-up on the whole group,

Now that has two parts to it there. If you notice somebody getting groggy suddenly and inexplicably when the others aren't, you know he's got a mock-up where he shouldn't have one. So you just ask him, "Where did you put that last mock-up?" He'll say, "I put it behind me."

You say, "Put the next one in front of you and go on with the rest of the mock-ups." And you should shift for the whole group the mock-ups and the position of the mock-ups where - at regular intervals, let's say, at the ratio of about six mock-ups.

Don't ever go on about - more than about six mock-ups without saying, "All right, now put them behind you," and six more mock-ups without saying, "Put them on the right of you," and six more, "to the left of you." And six more, "above you." And six more, "below you." And then "in front of you" again.

You'll have to remind people of this once in a while. And you should change them around because they will very often have the idea of putting a mock-up out there in front of them. And they shift it behind them for one mock-up and then they put the next one out in front of them again because they got too strong a flow running and the flow is mastering them, and they're no longer mastering the flow You see how that would be? All right.

So, we shift the mock-up around. And when anybody starts boiling off, if they just boiled off and you didn't catch them in time, it's nothing very dangerous. They'll just simply sort of snore it off. And if you want to wake them up, you don't have to take them out someplace or do something special or get smelling salts or something. Just kind of shake them awake a little bit, easily and gently because they can be startled with this, and you just say, "Where was the last place you put a mock-up?" And they say, "I put one - I don't know."

And you say, "Well, put a mock-up, now, in back of you. Now get a current of water flowing at that mock-up," or some such thing or "Get something flowing from the mock-up to you." And all of a sudden they'll brighten. That's all. And you just got the way they'll run. Well, they'll brighten right up and they'll wake up on something like this. Now, therefore your mock-ups should be placed, and if placed too long in one position, will cause boil-off; and boil-off is just too long a flow in one direction. That's all that happens.

There is nothing else you need to know about boil-off. It just happens that that's it. It means that the particles are changing in location to each other so as to produce and restimulate an old period of unconsciousness. That's what's happened,

It doesn't matter, by the way, about boiling off. If you had a person boiling off for hours and hours and hours and hours and hours - we've boiled them off for as long as three hundred hours with no slightest benefit to the case. So don't get the idea it'll do the case any good, because it won't.

Now, these mock-ups will do all sorts of things. They'll fly around like mad, They will go into various erratic levels of action. You can't be too sure of what the mock-up is doing for your group. Well, at a Group Auditor level you don't care what this mock-up is doing because you can be sure it's going to get better. But at first, you will have various erratic things happening about a mock-up. You will have a mock-up occurring there that, well, every time he gets a person, this person is jumping a hoop over - through a hoop. And just keep jumping through the hoop. He didn't tell this person to jump through the hoop, it's just what happens to this person. He will eventually get to a point where he's no longer doing this. I mean, it'll wear out.

Erratic things not called for. Now, they'll complain to you that their mock-ups are doing these things or they will think it's very funny to have a mock-up amuse them this way. You needn't pay any attention to it at all. You can just know that mock-ups are going to do strange and peculiar things. And if you must do something about it, just get them to admire that peculiarity and it'll disappear. The theory behind mock-ups is that the MEST universe is an illusion, and that one must increase one's ability to create illusions in order to exist better and perceive better the MEST universe. And to think better, one certainly must be able to handle illusion. If he can handle illusion, he can handle imagination, which means he can handle the future. And the future is computational. Actually, what it is, is putting electric terminals into the future when you put mock-ups for the future: things to be admired, things for which I'm going to be admired.

Now, you do mock-ups in order to rehabilitate the individual's control of objects, persons, things, and these things all occur rather regularly. The processing of an individual of the group, away from the group, should be done just with that. You should take this individual all the way out of the group if you're going to process him. Now, I've mentioned to you this: you shouldn't process an individual all by himself up there in front of the group, because you've given him a special mock-up, and now the rest of the group will want special mock-ups. And you've cut down their ability to get mock-ups. So you just mark this trouble down as trouble and decide that you're now going to give him special mock-ups only in the absence of the group, And preferably so that the group doesn't know about it.

In other words, just - the class or the group's filing out or something of this sort. And you don't keep the person in the room and say, "And now we're going to process you some more," something like that. You say, "Well now, come in a little bit early tomorrow," or get them away from the rest of the group if you're going to do this at all. Or have an entire group that you're going to process individually. You get that?

You spot all of the people you've got to process individually and you move them into an awkward squad. And make sure that you call it an awkward squad or something of the sort and don't make it desirable at all. And so the rest of the group - the rest of the group don't get upset and so forth by this.

Children particularly are very touchy on this subject. You can take out a certain strata of the group that you're processing and then handle them individually and put them back into the group again. You will find yourself doing this quite often.

It is not terribly necessary that you do this. You save two-thirds of this group, you've done better than would have happened with these individuals otherwise. It's rather obvious.

If you want to take that other third and do something very special for them, you'll find out that it'll pay dividends. You just bring them up to a level where they can hold their own with the rest of the group, though.

Now, the use of mock-ups by a professional is very wide and very varied, and a great many things can be done with this, but I would advise you in handling mock-ups in general and so on to leave that on a professional level. Handle them on these lists and handle them in Self Analysis, you're on good, sound, safe ground. And use admiration of their imperfections, you're still on safe ground.

You start going into specific mock-ups or specific illnesses and specific things and so on, it requires a considerable command of the subject in theory and of flows and other things in order to get away with it. There's no need for you to do that. You give individual processing in terms, then, of Self Analysis, and you don't worry too much about a professional level action.

If you have a case that is very bad off, a case that's very, very bad off, get that case - if it has to have very special individual address get that case some professional auditing. Don't try to go too deeply into individual cases yourself. It's very true that you can handle psychosomatic illnesses in children and adults, but I would advise you to handle them with Self Analysis.

And a psychosomatic illness is easily remedied, by the way, with list processing - processing by a list. Very easily remedied. Just have them put mock-ups in the area where the psychosomatic exists. Just have them keep putting up mock-ups in there. And then shift the mock-ups around here and there and put the mock-ups back in that area again.

Let's say they got a headache. And well, have them put mock-ups in their head for a while. But if the child has some permanent "permanent" - disability, it's - you'll find out that this won't be hindered. I mean, you won't - this child won't be hindered in any way by giving him processing as a member of a group or by giving him list processing. The child won't be hurt by it and might even recover from it. But I wouldn't expect it as a matter of course or demand that it happen. Do not treat this with the level of seriousness, in other words.

If it's handled by Group Processing, all right. And if it's not, your individual processing should be limited to putting people in shape so that they can keep pace with the group. And I've given you how to do that. Now, it'll happen quite incidentally that a lot of psychosomatic illnesses will turn off in your group. Just consider it a bonus. You're trying to make people better able to live; you're not trying to make them well.

People come around and say, "Isn't that remarkable. Our little Bertram always had sinusitis." Or this group of war veterans you may be processing may have had all manner of shot and shell go through it, and you might have them, while doing your session, have them flopping around like fish out of water with somatics. Don't pay any attention to it. So they hurt. Good. The somatic will run out. That's all. You just keep on with this.

Now, the handling of a psychosomatic illness is very simple, but you must have this piece of information: You must be consistent and persistent in mock-ups to run a somatic all the way out. A somatic is liable to turn on during the processing session where you're handling the whole group, and then the somatic is liable to come on stronger and stronger and stronger. And you as a Group Auditor could very easily lose your head and say, "My goodness, oh, dear! What am I doing to this poor man? He says if we give him just one more mock-up, it'll bash his brains in."

Well, I'II tell you what you do in that case: You give him just one more mock-up. And then you give him another dozen, because his brains in his head is not going to split him.

Whatever is turned on by Creative Processing will turn off by the same process. Now, don't mix processes, If you start in with a list, finish with a list. If something turned a man's headache on, for heaven's sakes, keep on with the same list. Don't suddenly switch off and start running flows on him. You could put the mock-ups in new places and that sort of thing, but don't suddenly turn around and say, "Well, we better run out an engram." No, no. No. The best process for it is Self Analysis type lists. And you run it until it runs out.

Now, the easiest way to do something like that is, if your - if you have an older group, is to give a book to somebody or other, if somebody gets into trouble, and just tell them to go out in the other room and finish it off. Make somebody else read the list to them rather than give that person special attention yourself, because you'll have everybody with somatics on. All right.

Another thing here is mock-ups must not be a consecutive story. You'll find it a very inviting idea to tell a story of Br'er Rabbit to a group of children with a series of mock-ups. Don't do it. No dice. You know why?

There's differentiation, association, identification. And identification is at 0.0 and association is at 20.0, and differentiation, which is the essence of sanity itself, is at 40.0. And we want mock-ups which change the subject radically. And as long as we change the subject radically, the child doesn't suddenly get a story of his own turning on, or the adult doesn't get a story of his own turning on and start paralleling it.

In other words, you give him Br'er Rabbit and you say, "All right, now mock up a carrot." "Now he's lippity-lopping to the store." "Now get him there with the storekeeper." "Now get the Big, Bad Wolf coming in the door." And this child, you would think, would be terribly absorbed with this story. No, no, He's now got - he's now got Grandma. And the more you give him Br'er Rabbit, the more Br'er Rabbit looks like Grandma. And you're just digging his grave, that's all. You're just plowing this kid right on in. Why? The MEST universe is logical. Stories are logical. If you really want something that works well, get it as widely apart as possible from mock-up to mock-up.

"Now mock up a fire engine." "Now mock up a beauty shop." "Now mock up the vinegar works." "Now mock up a bottle of ginger ale." "Now mock up a movie actor." "Now mock up a cow." We just get this jump, jump, jump, jump. And that's what a list, in essence, must do. Then we get the "associative level" of logic chopped into and broken up. It is that level of associative thinking which has led this person along this line, The reactive mind is not capable of differentiation; it's only capable of identification. And as long as we ask it to associate, we're bordering on identification. It'll very shortly start to identify.

So let's go up the level where we're perfectly safe, which is differentiation, and give different mock-ups one right after the other, And that's why these lists are important. And that's why you should process from a list even if you're doing your own hand-out processing, because you have a tendency, when standing in front of people and giving them things, to connect them and associate them.

You know, you sort of feel the pressure and you give a - "All right, let's give a fire engine," "All right, now let's have a ladder." "Now let's have a fireman," "Now Let's have a wheel," "Now let's have a fire." "Now let's ..." See, you're all on the same subject. That's identification. And that's not a good list. So, if you want a list for a special group, you should sit down and then just figure out a lot of things, no matter how well associated they are, and then just rewrite them so they're all cluttered up and not in association anymore. See how that would be? Then, that's what's done.

Now, the theory of Self Analysis and similar lists is the theory of terminals. And the theory is that you're putting up, by creative levels, new terminals, and you're keeping them divorced from the real universe. You're keeping them as unlike the real universe as you can. And you do this for several reasons. But one of the chief ones is it is one way of meeting a level of knowingness which is very high.

A Level of knowingness is very important. How much does your preclear know he knows? You can pick up the rest of this information from books, you can pick up this material here and there, hearsay - figure it out.

But get this one. Burn this in. Sort of so it'll scorch a little bit. You want to establish a level of certainty: certainty of location, certainty of knowledge, certainty of beingness. The child who is uncertain, the adult who is uncertain is a child or an adult that isn't well. You want a level of certainty.

How can you quickly reach a level of certainty. Have him mock up a scene; have him make it his scene, and he knows where it is. He's got a certainty! And that is a fast way of reaching a certainty. So when somebody is getting very little benefit from mock-ups, ask him these questions: "You know where it is? You know where this mock-up is?" The fellow will all of a sudden tell you "No!" You say, "Well, put it there on the windowsill," "Yeah, I can do that."

It never occurred to him before. He's had these mock-ups all over the universe but he's never known where they are. Maybe they were in his space, maybe they weren't in his space. So he had no certainty of location. And the other one is "Is it yours?" Fellow says, "No." "Well, make it yours." "Well, uh ... Yeah, I can change it a little bit."

"Well, change it. Now change it some more. Now do you know whose it is?"

"Yeah. Yeah, it's mine." He'll brighten right up. Level of certainty. And that's what you're trying to achieve. You're getting a certainty of a terminal.

And he's - can get inner flows from these terminals. Now, you can do two mock-ups for each one if you want to, and you'll get some interesting results. You can have him make his last mock-up last on the right, and put his new mock-up on the left, just for variation.

Make him do two mock-ups out there at the same time. Let his old mock-up persist and then put a new mock-up alongside of it. But that's not important, not near as important as establishing a level of certainty. Does he know it's his?

If anybody is having real trouble with mock-ups, it's because he doesn't know they're his and he doesn't know where they are. Of course, "doesn't know where they are" also means he doesn't know when they are. When is that mock-up? And that becomes very important to him.

Now, in conclusion, the function of the Group Auditor is seen to be a very important one from the level of Dianetics and Scientology. And it's important from the level of groups. I'll give you a little bit of an idea of a preliminary test on this, and this is from an actual record of a test which is going on at the present moment.

Self Analysis was given for a relatively short space of time to a group of children that varied in number - same children, but the influenza epidemic, you know, was going on, so the group was varying between twenty and thirty. And the previous gain of this same group in reading age before Self Analysis was between .9 and .5 months per month, according to the ability of the teacher. That's the previous gain - .9 to .5 months per month.

Now, the gain in reading age after three-and-a-half weeks of Self Analysis on the average for those students was 4.0 months! By actual tests, just by standard school tests, LCP tests.

The average gain was from .9 to .5, and the gain after three-and-a-half weeks of Self Analysis was 4.0 months. That happens to be a gain somewhat in the neighborhood there, oh, somewhere between 5 and - 5 and 8 per - 800 percent.

Now, some of these made no gain because they were absent during the influenza epidemic. And that's included in that average of 4.0. They're included there. And there were many gains of 6, 7 and 8 months of reading age.

And there was one of 11 months and one of 13 months with three-and-a-half weeks of Self Analysis given for about twenty minutes per day to this group. So you're not dealing with anything light. And because you don't see something terrifically dramatic happening right off the bat, don't worry about that.

This is a group of very backward children who should be in an institution, but are in class and in school because there aren't enough institutions.

It was the more intelligent ones of the class who made this terrific gain of 9, 11 and 13 months. They made this terrific gain. They were the more intelligent ones. What this does in a higher level class is subject to further testing, but this is a low-level class. So that your benefits and gains are the benefits, by test, of putting the child in a frame of mind where he can be instructed. And that's what you're trying to do.

And in terms of an adult, you're trying to put him in the frame of mind where he can be interested in life. And after that, you can instruct them and interest them. But unless you have done that first step there you have a missing bridge, which is going to hold down the third dynamic wherever it is missing.