This is January - goodness sakes, watch - it’s the sixth, it says!

Well, our main consideration in instructing you along these lines of advanced clinical training are very, very finite. There’s a point here in my mentioning this goal several times, on some off chance somebody might get the Idea that I mean what I say, if I say it often enough.

“What I tell you three times is true,” by the way, is one of the bywords of the society. If they say, “eat Pushmor” once, that isn’t so. But if they say “eat Pushmor, eat Pushmor, eat Pushmor,” then everybody has to.

But here we have, in this Unit, the goal of turning out not only some good auditors but some excellent Instructors. Now, we haven’t had that goal so much in other Units and, actually, we have in Dianetics and Scientology, practically oh, just a tiny handful of people who can instruct. One of them is in this Unit - as a matter of fact, there are two in this Unit who are very good at it already.

Well, I don’t - not trying to set up this Unit as an example of instruction so much as to give you the fundamentals of instruction itself. And to lay down for you the various methods by which you can train individuals.

The Navy has a method and it forgot about it a good many years ago, but it still has the method on paper. And that is to say, that you put the guy in the place where he’s supposed to be and you put him back there every time he steers off of it and you do this often enough, he will eventually be in that position, performing those evolutions in spite of anything that happens in his vicinity. Now, that is a method of overcoming lack of courage, in overcoming lack of brains, lack of foresight and everything else. It’s simply a mechanical method.

Every time the fellow wanders off course, you fix him again in the position where you want him. In such a way, you get a gun trainer or a gun pointer, you get a chief petty officer or you get an officer of the deck who will perform his duties straight through to the end. And generally, a Navy so trained becomes unbeatable.

The British Navy adopted this method of training probably about two hundred and fifty years ago. And for a long, long while, nothing could stand up to British men-of-war, although the odd part of it is, is they were inferior in terms of tonnage and armament. It was just a matter of training, nothing else. Nothing ever threatened the British Navy until the people the British Navy had trained, such as John Paul Jones and so forth, also got some ships.

And the American Navy has followed along fairly well in this tradition until recent years. I don’t know what they’re doing now, but I noticed a young fellow the other day, he was wearing a navy blue raincoat and he had an army second lieutenant bar on the raincoat.

And I said, “Well son,” I said, “what service do you belong to?”

And he said... looked at me strangely and just - I thought he was a bellhop or something, the way a lot of people do - and informed me that he belonged to the US Navy.

And I thought, “Well, I thought maybe you belonged to the nautical branch of the US Army.” The US Army gets very hungry every few decades and has to consolidate into the War Department, the Navy Department. And this lasts until the Navy Department is found to be unworkable in this circumstance, at which time they re-create and separate the Navy Department out.

We think we’re sb modern by having a Department of Defense. That’s what the name “War Department” meant when it was formed, very early. This curious, curious government which has a department called the War Department” which includes the Army, Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force, or anything even vaguely resembling it, has it for a hundred years or something on that order, then creates a Navy Department and separates out the Navy and the Marine Corps and then turns around and re-creates a Department of Defense in order to incorporate the War Department and the Navy Department. This is what is known as involution.

Well, anytime you get training of a repetitive pattern, which is entirely mechanical, which has to do with putting the man in the place and making him go through motions, you’re going to get a certain degree of success. But believe me, you’re not going to get any thinkingness.

Now, anytime you get services mixed up and scrambled up and this and that and so forth, you’ll begin to understand that the people in those services don’t know what the hell they’re doing. I mean, they’re not just stupid, they’re ignorant. But they are well trained. They’re really well trained. The definition of that kind of training is “no change.” So don’t bring out a 20 mm Oerlikon, even though it can shoot 600 rounds a minute, when they’re perfectly satisfied with a muzzle-loading serpentine.

The resistance to change, then, goes up, to the degree that an individual is trained on the procedure I’ve just mentioned. Resistance to change goes up, to the degree that the individual has been trained into “no change.” And we get these two factors combining and we find therein that the last way we want to train an auditor is so he won’t think and won’t change. Because what the auditor is being trained to do is to produce a change in the preclear. And if the auditor can’t change, believe me, the preclear never will.

So our training must have some happy medium between reestablishing a complete freedom and autonomy on the part of an auditor - which in itself, by the way, is not too desirable, since he will never have anything where he can sit back and relax and let the wheels spin for a little while, you know? There is that. And if you don’t give him that, why, you’ve made him be original and made him look every day and so forth. And let’s be a little practical and realize that as the techniques approach a higher level of workability and the common denominators are more easily understood and seen, that the auditor has less and less problem, actually, with the idiosyncrasies of the preclear’s case.

And, as such, then, you should strike some medium which permits the auditor to sit back on training you have given him. So you’d better give him some training of the type which just simply grinds it out. Complete autonomy is not desirable. And complete slavery and complete rigidity is alike not desirable.

And so, somewhere between these two, we have to solve the problem of the education of an auditor. I am told, although I have no proof for it and never in the past have I attended one of their schools, that the Jesuit Order prided itself on educating an individual without yet breaking his pride. And I suppose that their ability to do this had some foundation in the very toughness of the Jesuit Order itself. The order was so thoroughly tough that it, at length, became a threat to the entire Catholic Church and was banished.

The Order of Jesuits today, if it exists at all - I think it exists as a name - is not the Order of Jesuits of which you hear back down through history. That was one of the roughest, toughest, meanest bodies of men who ever lived. A Jesuit would go out into the farthest outpost and then strike off to go somewhere. And when he got finished putting a post together or a school together or something on that order, it stood. And as you cruise around the world, if you ask, you will find that most of the firm foundations that are standing in our civilized society in this world were, one way or another, founded by the Order of Jesuits.

Now, this is a very strange statement to make in view of the tremendous pioneering efforts on the part of so many people, but here was an order which, itself, didn’t conceive of any limitation on human flesh. It didn’t believe that this could happen, that anything could harm or hurt or upset a human body. And operating on this premise, the . .. For instance, it was the senior order to many other branch orders and its training was felt in many directions. It was very ironclad.

Now, there, the failure of that order, by the way, was the failure of the Catholic Church. When they pulled the props out from underneath that, they just might as well have folded up their tents. What have they got now? They’ve got a few churches and some paintings by Michelangelo.

But when it comes to training, this organization reputedly - I don’t know this by experience, but reputedly - was the one which was sought out by the aristocrats of the civilized world to train their sons. Because they could train these boys without breaking their spirit. Well, how did they do that?.

I suppose they just set up some sort of a standard whereby the boy would consider himself so much tougher than anything else that he didn’t have to pay any attention to fatigue or worry or concern about his future. He was just too tough, that was all. And so, he had all the latitude in the world to be graceful and to be learned and to carry forward on his own self-determinism. And, you see, a fellow actually could be trained into his self-determinism.

Well, it’s not an optimum solution for you as an Instructor to simply grind down hard on an auditor continuously and balk his understanding and override his questions and say, “Well, all right, you do it according to the book” and so forth.

Neither is it optimum to let him wander too far. Because if he starts wandering way off and getting terribly thinking about thinkingness and so forth, why, he’ll waste a lot of time for you. And he’ll start covering ground that has been covered, that you, as an Instructor and knowing undoubtedly more than your student knows, will know has been covered and that you yourself have looked at many of these things. And you will find him wandering off and wasting an awful lot of instruction time on investigation of things which have no bearing on anything but his own case. You’ll find men love to examine those things which make it possible for them not to look at what they should be looking at.

All right. So these problems are posed. And believe me, these are the same problems that we have right here. We have no different problem right here. We have here a group of people who have, uniformly, some experience - a lot of experience and a lot of instruction. But we have another problem which you’re never going to have: most of this group got raised up, you might say, in a subject as it evolved. And that is a little bit different, that is just a little bit different than taking a straight level of subject and presenting it. So that, actually, most of the people here are completing three years of training. They won’t even complete this three years of training, because I never consider that anybody who’s gone through a Clinical Unit - I never consider that he is topped off. I never expect to see him in another school, but I do expect him to carry forward on some application and do a paper or two and hang his name up for himself a bit there, so that, a little bit later on, we can make a Doctor out of him. Now, that’s right in the cards, and this is the level we’re training at.

That’s why I tell you we can’t really take this pattern of training for the training pattern you’re going to use on auditors. You see, we’re a different school than the one you will be running. So I just give you that word of caution and the only reason I’m talking about it this early in the course is, later on, some of you are going to be training auditors. Or you’re going to be training group moderators or you’re going to be training people who will be working in communications or you’re going to be training something or other and you’re liable to think of the kind of a training course I carry on or you’re liable to look at this course and think it’s a pattern. And you’re liable to do this without thinking that you’re doing it. See, I just want to call to your attention that you’re liable to do it. This isn’t. This is a relatively informal group. You will have to be a lot tougher - a lot tougher on a group of students than I ever expect to be on you.

Because I expect to be tough on you in quite a different way than by the discipline of what you know. The toughness that we have here is just this one thing: you’re damn well going to be able to get results on preclears and you’re damn well going to be able to train people when you get through here.

It’s just a certain strange little determination I have - that’s peculiar perhaps, but I intend to do that on a pretty well personalized basis. I can line you up and size you up and I know about where you’ll go and about where you’ll go off, right now. And I’m not watching for you to pull something or fall by the wayside or something of this sort or anything like that and I don’t expect to do it by your faults, but I expect to do it by giving you your instruction in various slanted ways so that it fits your personal problems.

Well, that’s an entirely different kind of education than you’ll be doing. Yes, because when I can see that you, training a group of students, will be training them from a standardized level of processing, number one, see? You’ll be teaching them how to apply something or other and something or other and something or other and so on. Furthermore, you will run things with a punctuality of schedule, to save your own skin and your own time. And again, you will put a great deal of weight on . .. You can’t help this. I mean, you just fall into the rut the second you go into education - you’ll put weight on their quizzes. And you’ll put some evaluation on what they speak up and how quick they answer back and so forth. So your tendency is to just standardize the living daylights out of it if you don’t watch yourself. And the other tendency is, of course, to run it very loose and highly personalized.

Now, if you’re going to just sit down and train a couple of auditors, oh yeah, you can do a terrific job. No formula, no formulization, nothing like this. You just do a very, very personal sort of job of training on the auditor. It, by the way, is not really as beneficial as training him in a bigger group. He never really feels he’s been trained because he hasn’t been part of a mass.

There’s a certain mass necessary to a good feeling of training. That’s not a military man talking, it just happens to be true. For instance, because thee and thee went through another Unit and certainly this Unit together, why later on, thee and thee meet in a large class of students and so forth and thee and thee - you really don’t have much of a tendency to include them in, in the conversation.

You’ll fall into a caste system if you’ve gone through in a Unit. And there’s nothing wrong, by the way, with a caste system. It at least avoids this horrible thing called equality. “Fraternity, equality, fragility.” [laughter]

One thing that you’re going to be victimized by a little bit - but I hope not very much - is getting a terrific amount of data before it can hit where it lives on your case.

And I haven’t been feeding you very much data. Most of the data we’re being fed - evening there, you’re supposed to get definitions, did you get definitions last night? That’s right, you’re supposed to get those for quite a little while. I find out it makes a lot better auditors when they know what the tools are, because those are just basic tools. That’s like, this is a hammer and sooner or later you’ll all of a sudden look at them on the basis of, well, this is a hammer, you know?

All right. You’ll have to decide too, in training auditors—another little thing that just occurred to me - how much processing you’re going to give them before you tell them anything. Now, the optimum is, is to process them before you tell them anything, process them, with what we have now, three, four weeks at least and never let them look at anything.

But do you know that would be silly to do that to you? It’d just be silly to do it to you for the good reason that we’ve already entered into our problem here - this problem - you already know the data. And so, to forbear on telling you data on the grounds that it would speed up your case is, of course, silly. But this is not true of somebody you get in who has just read a book or two and maybe audited somebody out of a textbook or something like that. And you get him in there and you slam him in an auditing chair and you keep him there for three or four weeks and you train him up from there and, boy, you have reaped riches. More darn things - in fact, when you start to train him, he’ll understand a lot more.

A few years from now, you’ll never be able to convince anybody that it’s an evolution of information. You know, it’s just a subject. It didn’t evolve anyplace. But it’s a subject and it has this kind of a shape and so forth.

Well, so I stand here trying to make up my mind whether to process you on this or 7 tell you about it.

Female voice: Oh, process us.

Audience: [various responses]

Well, if I give you the personal experience of this, you certainly will never miss on it So I guess Г11 just butcher you, because honest to Christ, I don’t know which way to butcher you. [laughter] I can butcher you by telling you about it or butcher you by Group Processing you on it. Now, it’s a little bit on the side of butchery, because you’re going to stick somewhere - I know it.

This is the beefiest technique that you can run on a preclear, so let’s run it.

Let’s take the gradient scale and all I’m going to do - I’ll tell you exactly what the technique is, it’s a gradient scale, from Know down on through Look, Emote, Effort, Think and Symbols; in brackets, resistance to and DEI.

So, the first thing I want you to get is get the idea of resisting symbols.

You get the idea now of resisting symbols. Just sit there and get it.

Now put somebody else out in front of you.

Put somebody else out there. Now get him - he’s resisting symbols, not your symbols or anything, he’s just resisting symbols.

Okay. Put two more people out there, two more people. And have one of them resisting the symbols of the other one.

Now have this one - you’ve still got those two people now, get this, still one - have him resist the symbols of the other one for somebody else.

Now throw those away and put somebody else out in front of you and get him resisting your symbols.

Now throw that one away.

Put another somebody out in front of you and get you resisting his symbols.

All right. Now get you resisting his symbols for somebody else. You resisting his symbols for somebody else.

Now get him resisting your symbols for somebody else.

Now let’s put a flock of symbols out there resisting symbols.

And put another flock of symbols resisting the symbols of the flock of symbols that were just resisted.

Now set up another set of symbols to resist the symbols which are already being resisted elsewhere.

Okay. Throw all that away now.

Now let’s put somebody in front of you and get this other person resisting thinking.

All right. Throw him away and get you resisting thinking.

All right. Put somebody else in front of you and get you resisting his thinking.

All right. Throw that away. And put two other people in front of you, one resisting the other’s thinking.

Okay. Now have him resist the other’s thinking for somebody else.

Now throw those away. Put somebody else in front of you and get you resisting this other person’s thinking.

And get you resisting it for somebody else.

Throw that person away and put another one in front of you and get him resisting your thinking for somebody else.

Okay. Throw that out.

Get you resisting effort.

And now get somebody else in front of you and get him resisting effort.

Now throw that away. Get two other people in front of you and have one resisting the effort of the other.

Now have him resisting the effort of the other for somebody else.

All right. Throw them away. And get somebody in front of you and get yourself resisting his effort.

Now resist his effort for somebody else.

And throw that away. And get somebody in front of you resisting your effort.

Now get him resisting your effort for somebody else.

Okay. Throw that away.

Let’s get you resisting emotion.

All right. Now let’s get somebody in front of you resisting your emotion.

Throw him away. Get two other people in front of you, one resisting the other’s emotion.

All right. Have that one resisting the other’s emotion for somebody else.

Throw them away. Get somebody else in front of you and get you resisting his emotion.

Get you resisting his emotion now for somebody else.

Now get him resisting your emotion.

Now have him resisting your emotion for somebody else.

Throw it away.

Okay. Now let’s get you - let’s get you resisting looking.

All right. Now let’s get somebody else in front of you and get him resisting looking.

Now get him resisting your looking.

Now have him resisting looking for somebody else.

Throw him away.

Get two people out in front of you and get one resisting the looking of the other.

Now have him resist the looking of the other for somebody else.

Throw them away.

Now put somebody else in front of you and get you resisting this person’s looking.

Get you resisting this person’s looking for somebody else.

Okay. Throw them away. Now get you resisting knowing.

Okay. Put somebody else in front of you and get you resisting his knowing.

Throw them away. Get somebody else in front of you resisting your knowing.

Throw them away. And get two people in front of you, one resisting the knowing of the other.

Now get him resisting the knowing of the other for somebody else.

All right. Throw that away. And get somebody in front of you resisting your knowing for somebody else.

Throw that away. And get you resisting somebody else’s knowing for somebody else.

Okay. Now let’s get you resisting eating.

Get somebody else resisting eating.

Get this somebody else specifically resisting your eating.

Now get him resisting eating you.

Now get you resisting eating him.

Throw them away. And get two other people in front of you, each one resisting the eatingness of the other one.

Okay. Throw them away.

Now let’s get you inhibiting symbols.

You enforcing symbols.

You desiring symbols.

You being curious about symbols.

Okay. Let’s get somebody else in front of you and get this person inhibiting symbols.

Get this person enforcing symbols.

Get this person desiring symbols.

And this person being curious about symbols.

Oh, let’s throw that away and get two other people in front of you, one being inhibitive of the other’s symbols, one inhibiting the other’s symbols.

One enforcing symbols on the other.

One desiring symbols from the other.

One being curious about the other’s symbols.

Okay. Throw it away.

[loud crash] Make that ashtray crash.

Make the ashtray crash again.

Make the ashtray crash.

Now make the ashtray crash and protect everybody from the noise.

Okay. Let’s you waste symbols.

What’s a symbol? A word is a symbol.

Let’s get somebody else wasting symbols.

Somebody wasting somebody else’s symbols.

Get you wasting somebody else’s symbols.

And somebody else wasting your symbols.

Throw it away.

All right. Get you saving symbols.

Get somebody else saving symbols.

Now let’s get somebody saving somebody else’s symbols.

Now get somebody else saving your symbols.

And you saving somebody else’s symbols.

Okay. Now let’s get you accepting symbols.

Let’s get somebody else accepting symbols.

Now let’s get two people out there and get one of them accepting symbols from the other one.

Let’s get him accepting symbols from the other one for somebody else now.

Now throw them away.

And put somebody out in front of you and get you accepting symbols from him.

Get him accepting symbols from you.

Throw it away.

Let’s get you desiring symbols.

Somebody else desiring symbols.

Get other people desiring symbols from other people.

Get you desiring symbols from somebody else.

Somebody else desiring symbols from you.

Get you being curious about symbols.

Somebody else being curious about symbols.

Somebody being curious about somebody else’s symbols.

Somebody curious about your symbols.

You being curious about somebody else’s symbols.

Get you wasting thinking.

Somebody else wasting thinking.

Somebody else wasting somebody else’s thinking.

Somebody wasting your thinking.

You wasting somebody else’s thinking.

Now let’s get for sure now, you wasting thinking.

16о6 January 1954

Now let's get you saving thinking.

Somebody else saving thinking.

Somebody else saving somebody else’s thinking.

Somebody saving your thinking.

You saving somebody else’s thinking.

Get you accepting thinking.

Somebody else accepting thinking.

Somebody accepting somebody else’s thinking.

Somebody accepting your thinking.

And you accepting somebody else’s thinking.

And you desiring thinking.

And somebody else desiring thinking.

And somebody else desiring somebody else’s thinking.

Somebody else desiring somebody else to think.

And somebody desiring your thinking.

And somebody desiring you to think.

And you desiring somebody else’s thinking.

And you desiring somebody else to think.

And you being curious about thinking.

And somebody else being curious about thinking.

And somebody being curious about somebody else’s thinking.

Somebody being curious about your thinking.

And you being curious about somebody else’s thinking.

Okay. Let’s get you wasting effort.

And somebody else wasting effort.

And somebody wasting somebody else’s effort.

And somebody wasting your effort.

And you wasting somebody else’s effort.

And you saving effort.

And somebody else saving effort.

And somebody saving somebody else’s effort.

And somebody saving your effort.

And you saving somebody else’s effort.

And you wasting emotion. Now let’s really waste some emotion.

Somebody else wasting emotion.

And you wasting looking.

And somebody else wasting looking.

And you wasting knowing.

And somebody else wasting knowing.

Okay. Let’s grab the two back anchor points of the room.