Because, really, if you attacked the preclear directly, you would find out that you had selected him as the counter-effort and selected as your effort his aberrations and, of course, would swamp him.

Now, however much this has been in practice in old psychetherapy, however much this has been done here and there, it is not advisable in this field to select the aberrations of the preclear as your allies. Because then you line them up so that you and his aberrations attack him and his basic personality, and of course he won't come up the Tone Scale.

What you want to do is take the preclear as your effort and select out as the counter-effort his aberrations.

If one examines the structure of the physical universe, he will discover that it is composed of matter, energy, space and time, and that matter and energy changing position in space and time then manufacture motion.

Now, when you walk up to a preclear and you say something-"You're always saying something or other, something or other. Well, who said that!" Now, you're making yourself big, tough and strong by making an ally, an effort, out of his counter-efforts, and you're attacking him. Therefore, you reduce him on the Tone Scale quite markedly.

As a matter of fact, it may be matter and energy changing place in space and time which make space and time. It also may be that space and time in operation together produce matter and energy.

If you walk up to him and said - no matter how strange this might sound to him - if you walked up to him and said, "You know, knowing the family you've got, you must be an awfulIy tough guy to kick back all these aberrations." He'd come up the~one Scale whether he liked it or not, even though he might say, "What a corny remark" or something of the sort. He couldn't help it because you've selected him as an effort and his aberrations as a counter-effort.

This is sort of a circular computation, but it works out very observably into the fact that the physical universe has force as its common denominator. Motion is the real basic common denominator to all things in the physical universe. But force is the first common denominator characteristic of motion.

Now, one of the mechanisms of society in the control of individuals is: "Criticism is good for you. We are giving you constructive criticism," Now, if you give a person enough constructive criticism, he'll cease to exist. If you give an artist enough constructive criticism, he will utterly cease to "art."

No motion can be engaged upon which does not contain a potential or existing force. Now, this - you don't have to be very complicated on this. You ought to know your term though. Force is simply foot-pounds in the process of being exerted or to be exerted, of energy - some such unit of energy - capable of being exerted or being exerted.

This practice in the American university is responsible for the fact that the American university has proven itself completely incapable of teaching any of the arts, in any university, in any part of the country, under any management. I don't want to be particular or selective about this.

Here, for instance, we have a vector [marking on blackboard]. We have a vector here and let's say that this vector is a symbol which represents foot-pounds of energy. It just says that's x foot-pounds of energy. Now if I had that vector in my hand, it would be something that could be released or was being released and it could be released, however, in any direction. That's force. That is force.

A poll ofthe American Fiction Guild in the old days demonstrated that we had one major in English literature in our midst - one - who had studied writing in a university, It was a good university, and he'd studied all the way through and he'd gotten A straight through to the end. This fellow was a literary agent, Now, you see, that set him up beautifully.

Now, the second I say it is going to be released straight ahead, it becomes effort, because effort is force with direction. And as soon as your mind takes up the subject of effort, it adds to it intention, and that is reason.

Now, all of our constructive criticism, examining the fellow on this and examining the fellow on that, and doing something or other about trying to grade him and make him better and improve his imagination and do this about him and do that about him and do something else, is validating his inabilities and invalidating his abilities.

So we have here a vector which we are going to release; exert a vector which is going to be exerted or is being exerted, for instance, against that pillar over there. It's just a push against the pillar of one foot-pound of energy, let's say.

Now, the field of the arts must be of all things the most selfdetermined of any of man's activities. An artist who is not operating on his concept and his own interpretation, or a group of artists which are not operating on their interpretation of the material universe and the human race and the dynamics in general, will not produce art! This accounts for Hollywood. [audience laughter]

Intention: Well, present intention with it, is to demonstrate force and effort to you. But there's an intention with it, don't you see?

Now, when we have, then, constructive criticism, we only have a vicious method of reducing an individual's self-determinism, his ability and his reasoning powers - to keep him from producing. Grim!

Another intention: We exert it against a door. To do what? To close the door. So effort plus intention is reason. Reason has to include the thought plus the effort. Don't you see? Thought plus effort is reason.

"But, you know, you have to accept it because it's - I'm saying it for your own good, And I wouldn't really tell you this, but people really don't like you and if I - you know, they of course don't like to admit it - they don't say it to your face or anything like that - but if you'd just dress better, I think you'd get along fine," That's a very overt level.

&& I'm to do something, to be somewhere. If you're just driving out for a drive, you see, you're still driving out for a drive. I mean - and so, thought plus this effort is your reasoning.

And, "Yes, my dear, I think your hat is just stunning; I've thought so for years." That's on a covert level, But that's all on the same line, What passes for conversation amongst the "normals" today is actually very bitter, destructive invective, if you want to know the truth. Now, the criticism I have made of the American university and its utter and complete and dismal inability to instruct in the field of the arts is not intended personally for anyone in the universities And it is said only in sympathy for a student who has been subjected to this line.

I'm afraid you find that terribly simplified but it happens to be all there is to it.

The American universities two years ago graduated two hundred and eighty thousand Bachelors of Art - no artists. Supposing you graduated into a society two hundred and eighty thousand clear-eyed, well-trained, well-schooled, practiced artists. You would see that society change in its shape, color and structure in a single generation above the maddest dreams of anyone.

It's like this. When you drive down the street, you are driving down the street. You are directing yourself and there's so much force which is being directed by you. Now, directed force is effort. So you're exerting an effort as you drive down the street.

Two hundred and eighty thousand artists. They wouldn't have to graduate another one for a long time. And that alone as an act in one single year would change the entire society.

Now, people just don't just drive down streets. They drive down streets to go places, to do something, to be somewhere. If you're just driving out for a drive, you see, you're still driving out for a drive. I mean - and so, thought plus this effort is your reasoning.

Now, you see! You see what validating the individual as an able being might do instructionally!

The intention with relation to any force, the intention relationship to any force, gives one both data and evaluation. What is evaluation? It's an estimation of effort. A value. When we say evaluation or value, it means how much effort. It means now or in the future.

Well, a preclear is making himself very, very vulnerable indeed when he permits himself to be audited. And he is expecting you to validate him and his self-determinism as much as possible and fight against his aberrations. Your constant hammering and insistence that he is succumbing to his aberrations will cause him to succumb to them. Because what you're doing is telling him, "Now, the reason you can't run these is because you can't run them because they're too strong for you, and you actually are them, and how do you know that these aren't you, and where are you anyway?" He would become in very, very bad condition.

And by the way, this applies to imagination. It also applies to aesthetics. How much effort?

Actually, the whole art of addressing a preclear is the art of validating and inviting the confidence of himself, in himself.

A person, by the way, who sits around and daydreams all the time has an effort just to daydream. But the daydreams are toward a goal. They're always toward a goal! So this effort [tapping on blackboard] is the estimations of this and that.

In order to produce good, solid results with a preclear, you have to validate his ability to run an incident. You could even cheer a preclear up through an incident where he's suddenly bogging, by not giving him sympathy. Not invalidating him, you understand, but don't give him sympathy - saying, "Yes, I know it's awfully tough, but let's try to run it anyway."

"Well, let's see, I'll think of myself as uh, being a very rich girl and uh, I have uh-uh, I'll - oh, yeah and I meet this fellow and he's got twelve Cadillacs and so on. We walk in the store and I'm buying this diamond ring and uh..."

You should tell him, "Well, go ahead, the worst it can do is kill you" - something on that order. You consider it's a sort of a crack he isn't quite expecting out of you; you're not giving him sympathy. Therefore if you don't give him sympathy, it means you don't pity him. That means he's not down Tone Scale. That means he can probably run it.

You know? I mean, it's daydream, daydream, daydream. Well, it apparently, you see, is aimless. Only it isn't aimless at all because its first goal is to keep one amused so that one will stay in motion. So the daydream, you see, is keeping one in motion, keeping one alive. Or it's just a goal; it's something to do. It's action of a sort because one has not been able to achieve real action. So it becomes symbolized action and that's what symbols are, by the way. They're just pieces of something - of thought - which represent action or states of being in the material universe. Those are symbols.

Or if you said to him, "Well, go ahead, let's get rid of this lock where this truck runs over you and get in some real stuff," And by golly, that truck incident, if you say that, even if he knows you're joking, has a tendency to bloeu just on that, because he changes his evaluation of the incident.

All right. Here's this girl daydreaming. Of course, she is actually practicing the estimation of effort of what does it take to get a husband. And she's getting this thing into the future, and she's trying to figure out "Now let's see, what would I have on when I meet this fellow?" and so on. She's doing test situations; test situations continually. She's estimating future efforts because someday she may make those efforts.

People who stand around somebody that has had an accident occur to them and say sympathetic things: "You poor fellow. I'm so sorry that it happened. Oh, how will - I'll do my best to help you get over this." It means, "You poor boob, I can't possibly see how you would ever recover from anything like this, you weakling, and somehow or other I am going to give you enough of a helping hand so you can get your jellylike limbs and spirit into line."

Now, a person to think does not have to commit the effort necessarily. But the thought is concerned with estimating them. "How much effort is going to come in against me?" "How much effort am I going to have to put out?" "In which direction am I going to have to apply this effort, and so on, in order to continue in existence in this material universe along all the dynamics?" "Now, what - what am I going to do about this and about this and about that?"

I mean, let's put it in different words and retain the same meaning, and that's what sympathy is.

People who are worrying are estimating counter-efforts.

Now, there are three levels of doing something for a preclear, One is to do something for him and get him over his aberration, and the next is to make him comfortable, keep him up along the line, keep his tone from dropping any; and if you can't do that, you can give him sympathy. Because if you can't do steps one and two for him, he must be almost dead. He is so close to the bottom and so close to being on his way out that of course, if you gave him sympathy, it would bring him up to 0.5 or something.

People who are just a little bit better off in any state - a chronic or a temporary state - they're estimating the balance of their efforts against counter-efforts. They're estimating how well balanced these things are; how well balanced are they. "Do I have enough?" "I'm making sure that I have enough." Counter-effort, effort, estimation, estimation. "Do I?" "If my effort is so-and-so, their effort is so-and-so," and very, very definite, hard application of estimations of what is coming in and what is going out.

Sympathy is a two-edged sword. It is a weapon used by the overtly vicious to kill. And it is used also by individuals upon the almost dead to get them up enough so they'll live. It depends where a preclear is whether you really can give him any sympathy at all or not. But I have never found sympathy to pay off.

But mind you, right away there is something going out. They already have a concept that they have effort which can face up these counter-efforts.

A preclear came in one time, I rernernber this guy, this fellow was a wonderful case, an example of the fact that motion goes through an apathy case - goes through apathy. Because if you had picked up his little finger and touched it again, you just - motion would have just gone through it. You probably could have taken a sword and run him through the middle, and he probably would - never would have quivered. It just would have gone through him. He wouldn't even have looked through you - at you reproachfully. I mean, that would have required too much motion. He was really almost gone out the bottom.

Now, you see, we're drawing the Tone Scale again.

And he came in and he sat down and he started talking a little bit about "how horrible the world had been to him." Well, now I didn't tell him that the world was horrible to him so that it stuck. I sympathized with him. Oh, I just sympathized with him all over the place.

In apathy all that can happen is counter-effort.

And all of a sudden he realized I couldn't be possibly sympathizing with him to this extent, and he started to get annoyed. And he came clear up to 1.5. And he came up from 1.5, tapered off to about 2,2, and he ran like a well-oiled clock afterwards. The way I did this, simply, he'd tell me, "My ~other - and my mother was always mean to me and she beat me every day."

In grief, one can at least protest against the counter-effort; in other words, put an effort of protest back against them.

And I would say, "Gosh, every day. Did she beat you Sundays too!" (laughter) And he'd start in on it to give you - some sympathy again and then you would say, "Oh, on Sundays! Then she wasn't a Christian, was she!" No - just non sequitur about this whole thing. And he came up the Tone Scale and he showed me he could run engrams - "Raaaaah-rrrahrrrrah! " - he ran engrams.

In fear, one is definitely estimating counter-efforts in the hope - that - and fear has hope in it, to this degree - in an effort to hope that one may be able to dive in some direction and avoid them. And fear is a condition of alertness for counter-efforts which threaten survival. And a person becomes alert in fear. And they're saying, "Mm-gu-gu-gu, gu-gu-gu, what am I - just what am I going to do? What am I going to do?" and that's always bordering. Fear is inaction to action, inaction to action, action to inaction, so on. It's a vibration of indecision but it's - it's got a hope in it: "I may be able to dive." Because if there's no hope in it, it's apathy.

All right. Your attitude toward the preclear is differentiated by whether or not you're willing or unwilling to do anything for the preclear, and then whether you're going to validate the preclear or validate his aberrations.

All right, we go up higher along the line then, and we see this - the counter-efforts are coming in - this fellow is estimating how he's going to hold them, hold them, hold them, hold them back, hold them back.

Now, your willingness or unwillingness to help him will be dependent upon whether or not you have any sneaking idea in the back of your head as to whether or not you're going to use any of his aberrations or not for your own control of him. Just ask yourself that.

In antagonism, a person is estimating "How am I going to estimate this counter-effort?" or "What is the estimation of this counter-effort, so I can somehow or other turn it around and get - send it back where it came from, as damagingly as possible? Brrr-rowrh!"

You very often find out the preclear reminds you of your greataunt Agatha that you would dearly love to have busted the head of. And Aunt Agatha you were never able to control but, boy, you sure can control this preclear now. Ha-ha! And you're going to get there. And the next thing you know, you find yourself just butchering this preclear,

Yes, that's resentment, antagonism, overt hostility.

And you say, "I wonder why I'm doing that!" Butcher, butcher, slash, cut. "Well, you've only got that half run out. Well, let's go on to this later incident." Knowing full well that later incidents reduce much less easily than earlier incidents,

Now, in boredom, you're getting this same balance again. The counter-efforts which are coming in are not necessarily seen to be threatening, but they're not helpful. And it's a problem of, well, why estimate any efforts against them? It's a better estimation than it is below 2.0, because they see these counter-efforts are not terribly bad off. But that's mainly the trouble with them.

So it's a very good thing to ask yourself, "Let's see. Is there any reason why I don't want this preclear to get well!" And you're liable to straightwire out of a very startled you, the fact that you don't want this preclear to get well. Why not! Well - uh - umm... perhaps you've got this feeling like this person needs sympathy. And then you find out that this girl reminds you of the first girl you had in this life and this girl jilted you and you felt very sorry for it ever since. But when she did come back and tried to make it up with you, you found out that by being mean to her that made her feel - you know, and you get this terrific computation just going around in your head about some girl way back someplace or other that has nothing to do with this preclear.

One of the ways to get a person out of boredom is to pull out a .45 automatic and shoot at him a couple of times (laughter). That, by the way, provides enough counter-effort so that they immediately can estimate an effort of their own and they go out of boredom. Oh, I don't recommend this.

So you want to ask yourself that question. And you'll blow out these similarities of earlier persons to the preclear or difficulties which you are having in present time - financial, social, familial; any difficulty you're having in present time that might make it desirable for this preclear to stay on his present plane instead, of rise.

& But it gives you an idea.

Be fair with yourself. You very often discover that in spite of you being you and being fully, actually determined to do your level best in this one particular case, there's a little bug there that if you got it out and recognized it, all of a sudden, you'd find the preclear very easy to run.

& Female voice: How about CO2 therapy? You'll have to see Dr. Winter about killing patients.

Now, there's this one: You're about to run a preclear through an incident which you haven't had run on you - a standard incident like Facsimile One. And you want to ask yourself, "Now, do I want to run this preclear!" You want to recognize "I haven't had Facsimile run yet. And it's possible if I run Facsimile One on this preclear, I'm liable to get restimulated. These somatics are liable to turn on," so on~ "Am I willing to take this aboard!" And if you decide flatly that you are: "Sure, all right; so it doesn't matter. I probably won't get restimulated, Let's postulate that I won't, But if I do, it doesn't matter. And I'm going to go ahead and run the preclear." And you'll find out, then, that you won't be hauling out of this session halfway through and saying, "Oh, I can't go on, I've got such a terrible headache. My teeth are all hurting, and that something that just hit me in the stomach. I just can't go on running this preclear. "

& I don't mean anything catty, this has got to come off the tape.

So you want to take care of that one. And if halfway through the session, you find for some specious reason - you somehow or other realize this is specious - that you want to quit this session although the time isn't up, you want to knock off and go someplace else and you suddenly remembered an appointment somewhere or other, you grab yourself by the nape of the neck (you can, you know) and you say to yourself, "Now, let's see, um, why do I want to end this session!" And you'll find out they just hit something that was probably very hot - in you! And so you just grit your teeth and carry on. You see, you can.

& CO2 therapy - I'm not giving this talk to idiots. Where was I?

There isn't any reason you have to either go down Tone Scale or be restimulated or anything else if you don't want to be. The liabilities of your auditing of the preclear is just something that you should assess for every preclear you run. And you ought to kind of look it over before each session you run on the preclear just to see if this is all right now, we're all clear and we're going to run fine, and it's fine.

& Male Voice: About handling somebody in boredom.

If you want to be super-cautious before you've had Facsimile run on yourself completely out, why, you do this. And you'll find that your auditing is much better.

& Yeah, boom!

For instance, one day - I seldom was anywhere near the old Foundation, any one of the old Foundations, almost never inside their doors after the month of July 1950 - and I ran into an auditor, a staff auditor, in the hall and I said, "How are you getting along! I understand, somebody told me over the phone, that you're - were running a psychotic. How are you getting along!" "Huuhh. Well, it's all right. It's fine - and - hm ..." Goodness. I turned around to somebody and I said, "How's the psychotic!" "Well, her husband took her home yesterday." "Well, she was only here two days."

&& But (laughter) you have to see doctor Winter about killing patients (laughter). I don't mean any [unclear word]. This is got to come off the tape. Well, bad remark, might get off. Seroto-Therapy? I don't give this talk to idiots (laughter). Seroto-Therapy! Where was I? (laughter) [LRH is making some jokes with the public] Boom!

"Well, they had to. The psychotic went into hysterics and wouldn't stay around. Husband took her home and couldn't do anything for her. Dianetics couldn't help her." That's what they were practicing then.

All right. Now, at 3.0 a person is being careful or cautious, careful or cautious to shoot back the proper effort to balance these counter-efforts coming in. And if one is very careful to watch for the counter-effort and estimate it correctly and take his own effort and estimate it correctly he can hold a whole thing in a status quo. And that's good and safe and reasonable and one has to think quite a bit to do this, and we mustn't make any sudden moves because it might open a channel where an unseen counter-effort can come right on through.

"So what gives!" I said.

Now at 3.5, we again have a condition whereby the counter-efforts are being pretty well estimated for what they are and there isn't much reason to keep driving efforts back in there. Well, you can just hold them more or less, and so on. It's boredom again, actually - a boredom of sorts - but not anywhere near as bad as 2.5.

"Well, she just was such a terrible psychotic, there just was no possible hope for doing anything about her at all! And so I couldn't do anything for her, so the humane thing to do was to permit her to be taken home."

We get to 4.0 and we find the individual doing something interesting with counter-efforts. The guy is saying, "Hurrah, hurrah! Somebody's attacking me. Something's happening." And he's very cheerful about the thing.

And I said, "When did you have anything to do with psychotics!" And this auditor kind of gulped and said, "Well, I was a psychiatric aide in Brooklyn Medical Terminal Spinbin or some such name.

"Well, let's pick up these counter-effort vectors and let's see what we can do with them. We'll tie a couple of bowknots in them and we'll throw them back. Now, let's see, how can we fix these counter-efforts?"

And I said, "Oh, you were!" I said, "Did you ever have any experience with a psychotic who reminded you of this woman?" And this girl had been standing there, this auditor, she'd been shaking - she was usually a very good auditor - and she was just shaking all over up to this point.

Now, if you take a tennis racket, by the way, as an example, and if you receive the ball with the racket just slightly slanted from the perpendicular to the ball and roll the racket as the ball hits it, the power of the ball coming in sends the ball back. And it doesn't take any effort really on the part of the player at all, they - he just rolls the racket and the ball goes back. And a good tennis player really knows how to do this.

And all of a sudden said, "Ohhh! Oh, yes!" She hadn't had an experience, she'd had a cataclysm!

Well, that's a fellow who's very cheerful about the thing. He takes these counter-efforts and he uses them as fast as they come in. He uses counter-efforts and he just turns it right back - wham! He employs them.

This auditor had been attacked by the almost exact facial and physical duplicate of the preclear that had come in, had been attacked, clawed, had one eye almost pulled out, had her hair pulled out by handfuls and nobody had come to her rescue. And she just buried the whole incident and let this poor psychotic be taken home, four or five hundred miles away, by omitting step one.

And as you go on up the Tone Scale, a person gets to a point where eventually a counter-effort doesn't even come near him.

When she went into the incident with the psychotic, when she started to work with the psychotic, she had no restimulation, no inkling of the fact there would be anything wrong. But before she had been working with her for five minutes, there was something wrong.

There is a theoretical point on the Tone Scale where the individual would make a Mack truck bounce. Theoretically? That's a theoretical point, you understand. But that's what you're extrapolating toward.

Instead of stopping the session at that moment and saying to myself, "Somehow or other this person restimulates me; there is some reason why I can't make this person well" and going outside and getting a cup of coffee and let the preclear sit there on the couch and contemplate the sins of the world or something of the sort, this auditor goes on plowing along, plows the preclear into more somatics, more somatics.

So at the top of this band that concerns itself with counter-efforts and efforts, you have somebody who could stand in the middle of a highway with a Mack truck coming at him at sixty miles an hour and could go right on standing there, and the Mack truck would either jump in the air or fly into the ditch or do something like this. In other words, a counter-effort does - won't come anywhere near him. It's as though he's wearing a force screen or something of the sort.

What's this auditor trying to do to this preclear? She's trying to cripple the preclear so the preclear can't attack her? And being an auditor and working with - faster than light with how do you cripple a preclear, well, you turn on enough somatics and leave enough of them turned on so the preclear is completely crippled up and can't strike you and claw your eyes out and pull your hair out.

And by the way, I've seen it happen. Very remarkable. There are lots of people around that just nothing can happen to them. That's all. Lots of them. Just how it comes about you're never quite sure, but for some reason or other, why, anything that starts to break or starts to fly loose or starts to hit them or something of the sort will suddenly suspend action. It just sort of does something very completely unexpected. And it, by the way, never hurts anybody else in the vicinity.

And she recognized even the computation, the second that she got this one. You see what this could mean to her?

Now, for instance, there were certain people through the last war. They go into an area and there's no activity - I mean, everything stops. Things stop.

You can call this "clearing for the session," And if you clear just by recall for the session, you'll find out that you will spend much less time in the session.

This ship has, let's say, been getting hot and heavy and it's been getting slugged all over the place and all of a sudden it gets a new exec or something like that. And the exec goes aboard and after that for the next year the ship is in combat areas, it's in contact with the enemy, not a single shell is thrown at it and nothing happens to this ship - nobody gets hurt on board, nobody goes psychotic on board, nothing happens.

If you went and sat down in a corner facing the wall and said the alphabet backwards a couple of times and went through several rituals, and it took you two hours before every session to find out and scan and work with and get out of the road of every reason why you didn't want this preclear to be well, you would save time on three hour sessions - if you spent two of those three hours figuring out why you didn't want this preclear well. Because Facsimile One says, "You don't want anybody well. People are dangerous. People had better be controlled." And it will form locks right up into near present time.

And, by the way, this is very disgusting to people who are very low on the Tone Scale. And this, by the way, is the problem of the accident-prone. But this is just a theoretical problem. This is a theoretical level to give you some understanding of the two possible extremes.

An auditor, after he's audited preclears for a while gets - when he's not had his early incidents run - gets into a state whereby he is strong enough to carry on forward and try and try and try, and he thinks he's fighting preclears, and he's not fighting preclears at ail. He's fighting the sum total of all the times he didn't clean up preclears before he audited them - on himself.

Now the bottom extreme, of course, is where any counter-effort of any kind or description would - if it is even vaguely capable of direction at the individual - will hit him and go through him; that's apathy. If anything could possibly happen by stretching every law of coincidence, by making the most cockeyed positions for individuals to be in at this time, most unlikely circumstances will be posed so that this individual will be hit. So that this straw which blows down the street - it won't hit anybody else on the street - but somehow or other its velocity is such that it goes into his right ear and deafens him. I mean, this is the sort of a thing that you have at the lower part of the tone band.

And he just gets to a point finally where he feels like he's wading through glue, and preclears stop running for him because he's elected them as counter-efforts. He's elected them as individuals as counterefforts, he's elected their aberrations as counter-efforts, he's elected everything as counter-efforts and then he elects himself as a countereffort against himself. Why not just throw a bomb at the preclear and let it go at that? (laughter)

These people are very dangerous to be around, by the way, if your own tone is low. They're dangerous to be around anyhow because they'll sort of change factors on you a little bit and drop the factors down.

There's notfiing very mystical or metaphysical about this; this is very factual because it will show in your voice tone. It will show in your general attitude toward the preclear no matter how much you try to suppress it.

I knew one person, by the way, that no matter where he walked, no matter what he did, he and people around him got hurt. It just didn't matter much what was going on, somebody would get hurt. They'd just manage to get hurt somehow or other or he'd get hurt. That's accident- proneness.

Since I had a preclear once that I - just out of orneriness I suppose - I detested him. To this day I've never wiped up this preclear in the bank. I detested him, so I've continued to elect him as counter-effort.

National Casualty Company will demonstrate the actual existence of accident-proneness to this degree: An insurance company keeps close check on the books of corporations to make sure - and, by the way, I don't suppose it's supposed to be known, but I was never put under secrecy about it - checks these books to make sure that well-known accident-prones are not employed by certain corporations which they have under insurance. You could call this almost a labor blacklist. But it is death to have certain people in the shop. And they've just empirically noticed this and they've kept a record of it. And so that's in the cold, hard figures of the big office that computes these statistics and compiles them in New York.

He came over and after the most terrific agitation, invalidation, screaming, arguing, reneging and so on, consented to each session each time.

Now, when it comes to your liability in the society according to the Tone Scale, you can measure an individual's worth or liability just by measuring his counter-effort handling. What efforts of his own does he employ against what counter-efforts?

You would spend two or three hours of every time you audited him, out of maybe four or five hours, arguing with him about pointless things, about this and that. And he was so insidiously clever that he could get through the armor somehow or other.

Now, let's put this in a very, very, very mundane sort of a thing. Let's take boxing. Here are two boxers. We will assume boxer A is in apathy and boxer B is just a boxer. Boxer A is hit by boxer B. The counter-effort comes through; it finds boxer A with no guard up. The blow hits him, knocks him down and he lies there. That's apathy, you see.

And he'd mutter things under his breath instead of running engrams. He'd say, "Aw, you insidious fool, why, you're certainly a Pompous One, aren't you?" "Uh, what did you say?" you'd say to him.

Now, the odd part of it is, strangely enough, that boxer B has a tendency to hit boxer A much more often and much harder if boxer A is in apathy.

"I didn't say anything," he'd say, completely reversing your reality on everything and so on. And then he would suddenly start to brag about having done the most gruesomely detestable things - ooh? Oh, you know, like sadistic rape of little children and so on. And be so proud of it? So happy about the whole thing.

Now,we go up the Tone Scale a ways, and we have boxer A in the position where he is sure he is going to be hit. And he's lost, maybe, his championship anyhow, and so forth. And he'll hit and more or less fend back to the position he was in, but he'll just keep on taking punishment, punishment. Grief is what he's in, but he's actually sort of inviting these counter-efforts from boxer B.

Well, you can drive them up the Tone Scale or drive them down. ( laughter)

All right. Let's take fear. Boxer A boxing in there. He knows these counter-efforts are going to come through. He knows they're through. He's in a point of agitation and the counter-efforts come through. Now, all boxer B has to do is to feint with the right and hit with the left. He - all he has to do is make boxer A estimate that the blow is going to come from the wrong side and he's got boxer A. Because boxer A will fixate the second he thinks he knows where the counter-effort is coming from. Actually, fear is sort of a state of not-knowingness with regard to counter-efforts.

After my fourth session with him, I'11 tell you, he was polite after that. He was polite to everybody!

Now, let's take boxer A at 1.5 on the Tone Scale. Slug, slug. He wants to destroy boxer B, and he goes about it by putting up no guard whatsoever. He will use his full body to stop the blows, he will hold every blow that is hit at him and his entire effort is devoted upon destroying boxer B, so that he will continue to more or less hold a same level of motion throughout the thing.

A long while Later, another auditor got ahold of this preclear and started bringing the preclear up the line and got him back up the Tone Scale to where he was his old self again, and learned all about how he was a case failure as far as I was concerned.

Now, let's take him at 2.5 - he's bored - boxer A is bored. Boxer B keeps tap, slap, tap, slap and so forth. And this fellow just keeps knocking these blows away. He knocks the blows away. He's not interested. He doesn't hit boxer B. He just knocks away these blows. Tap - boxer B comes in - strike, strike, strike and boxer A in boredom keeps fending the blow, that's all; rather carelessly, by the way, and so, we can see there's - I'm using boxer B, you see, as counter-effort and boxer A is effort.

Of course, the preclear got about four or five sessions after that and got driven back down the Tone Scale again. (laughter) Now, that's one of the reasons I invented the Handbook for Preclears. Now, you be very, very cognizant of this fact: Every once in a while you're going to get ahold of somebody that you just would rather drown. You would just rather burn them alive inch by inch than even touch them. You might not find out why, if you haven't got the basic facsimiles run out.

Now, you take an individual at 3.0: he's boxing cautiously. He does not want to lose the fight. He's boxing efficiently. If damage is done to him, he'll fairly well do damage to the other person, almost in the same ratio. If the other person doesn't fight very hard, why, the fellow at 3.0 will tend to not fight very hard. He wants to hold a status quo with the thing. But he will continue to hold a status quo.

If you're crowding through this and working anyhow without having had a complete clear of your own bank, you'll run into this once in a while. And you'll search in vain: "Is he like Grandpa? Is he like Grandma? No, I like Grandpa and Grandma. Is it like that hired man? No, it wasn't the stable boy that beat the horse. Who was it?" You'll find out it was somebody in the year 1035 A.D. or something like that, that burned a nun who was a friend of yours, or something of the sort. I mean, it'll be something very deep, buried, and involved and long lost.

At 3.5, again we have boxer A in a situation where he will not particularly win. What he will do is flick off these blows as they're coming in, and so on. And, by the way, there is a little bit of insouciance or a capriciousness at 3.5 which would occasionally cause - you see, he's picking up interest in life, even though he's doing the same thing of being kind of bored about it, and he's actually doing something covert - he's doing a covert 4.0. He's just below that, he's doing a little bit of covert, and he will sometimes hit boxer B to be funny or in a funny place or in an unexpected place. Boxer B puts through this terrific haymaker, and boxer A at 3.5 fends it off. And as boxer B goes by, boxer A could very well by that - at that moment, probably, have planted the haymaker that would have ended the fight. And he won't do that. He will step back lightly and tap boxer B on the top of the head lightly and watch him go on by. You know, that kind of a reaction - that is the action of there. You find a 1.1 will do this on a very forced level for humor but a 3.5 will do it actually.

By the way, you can put yourself on a psychometer and ask yourself, "Is there any reason why I don't want to audit this preclear?" And if there is, it'll go bop And you'll say, "Is it in this life?" No answer. "Earlier life? How early? Ten lives ago? Twenty lives? Two thousand years ago? Thousands of years ago? Tens of thousands of years ago?" Bop.

Now at 4.0 you're liable to have this situation: every time - boxer A is at 4.0, you see, now - every time boxer B strikes hard and heavy, he will lunge forward. And you will find boxer A waiting for boxer B's forward lunge. Boxer A will take boxer B's forward momentum and use that as the bulk of the blow. He will put his fist in the right position so that boxer B will hit himself on the jaw, don't you see? He uses boxer B's motion to lick boxer B. And that's 4.0.

And you find out this preclear looks something like a monkey And you suddenly get this little somatic of a monkey eating your nose off while you lie dying or something. Oh, anything, it doesn't matter, but you can actually find it on the machine.

Now, it goes on up on this same harmonic, right on up the Tone Scale, to a point where, I guess on a heavy thought level, boxer A - if at this theoretical level were boxing there - boxer B would start to come into the ring to harm boxer A, would put his foot in the water bucket before he got into the ring, would turn upside down and miraculously wouldn't be hurt but wouldn't be able to continue the fight. And then the judges, in some peculiar fashion or other, would adjudicate that the fight had been fought and award the championship to boxer A, who of course didn't earn it at all, everybody could be expected to say, but at this theoretical level everybody would cheer and think this was fair.

But once in a while you might not have a machine handy and you'd just rather kill this preclear - or once in a while, the preclear himself is a walking, living overt act. (laughter) At that moment (and this is not the sole reason for that - oh no, very far from it), but at that moment when you recognize that the situation is going to be very rough and so forth, you get somebody in his environment who detests this person or who wants to force this person, control this person; explain to them how this handbook will make it possible to do so invariably; and then make them responsible for making sure the preclear works the handbook. And the preclear will come back to you much less detestable and easier to run. This is something which - one use of the handbook.

Male voice: Very true.

But the attack on the preclear must include the fact that some preclears, even to the most saintly of us, just plain don't deserve to get a bit better! (laughter)

Now, there is, again, the Tone Scale in terms of effort and counter-effort. I hope you understand very clearly now what I mean by counter-effort. There's no sense to dodge around and call it something else to make it simple or easy. It is the effort which counters one's survival.

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

One is making an effort to survive and he runs into things that are motionless in his road or runs into things that are in motion that don't want him to, particularly. Because those efforts which the individual picks up and utilizes for his own survival are, of course, really not counter-efforts. They're efforts.

You'll find that many preclears will use the most obviously reasonable but completely specious reasons as to why you aren't doing a good job. They will find reasons why you aren't doing a good job. They will find reasons to drop curves on you.

This fellow goes out and grows a vegetable garden. Well, those vegetables coming up out of the ground aren't counter-efforts to the gardener. They're his efforts. Even though he's not even there and the vegetables are growing and so on, why, every effort being made by the vegetables is being made for the gardener, so they're his efforts. So you see you have extended efforts.

You can fully expect a preclear - fully expect a preclear - to be enormously benefited by a single session, and suddenly drop a curve on you to an extent that if you weren't on, guard about this sort of thing, would rather leave you gasping.

In the old day, psychoanalysis used to talk about alter egos. Well, let's put it on a little more comprehensible line for our purposes and say that the efforts of - let's take Mother and Jimmy: Jimmy is Mother's boy; he's a very bright boy and he goes down and he wins the state polevaulting championship. Well, what do you know - that's Mother's effort.

Because there you sit all proud of having made this preclear better, then the preclear says, "Well, I've seen better auditing in a slaughterhouse," or something.

She says so to herself. It's just as thoroughly her effort as though she went down there and took that pole in her hands - having doffed her lace collar or something of the sort - and gone right straight on through with the pole vaulting and won the championship herself. Unless she's low on the Tone Scale, and this will be too much motion for her and she will elect Jimmy at that moment a counter-effort and treat him as such.

What you've done, if you are taken aback by this, is failed to estimate where you have brought the preclear to on the Tone Scale. Because you quite often are auditing somebody below - well below 2,0, well below 1.0, quite often, without really realizing it, until you see them start coming up through the bands.

This is also responsibility, isn't it, when you get down and think about it for a moment.

Wham - up they'll come. They'll come up to covert hostility. Covert hostility, remember, is a better and higher tone than grief, regardless of how simple it seems to be to get along with a person who is in grief or in apathy. You pick up their hand and you put it there and they stay there. And you say, "You're supposed to say something now," and they say something. You're their self-determinism in this case.

How much counter-effort or how much effort in the universe do you presume is serving you, or is yours? Not yours as a 1.5 "I am," but just yours as an individual. How much effort in the universe are you willing to accept as yours? The more you accept as yours, the less will hit you. And that, pure and simple, is responsibility - the level of responsibility. For how much effort are you willing to take responsibility? Because you will get as a counter-effort any effort you don't take under your responsibility.

But as you bring this person up the line, they get up to 1.1 or 1.5 and they'll drop a horrendous curve on you, maybe very overtly and maybe very covertly.

Let's take A and B, and they're not fighting for money - they meet each other in the street and A is challenged by B because of something A is imagined to have done. If A refuses to accept responsibility for this, he simultaneously accepts B as a counter-effort, at which moment B will hit him or strike at him, push at him or move him around one way or the other.

They may say suddenly - you were getting along just fine with this preclear - this little girl, she's so pathetic and she seems so sweet and everything, and you were helping her out so much. And suddenly she says, "I probably shouldn't tell you this but you remember the preclear you audited last week? You know, the one that you helped so much. Well, I think her family put her in an insane asylum yesterday." Zzzzoom! See? Builds you up - you're getting proud, you see, of the fact you've done something - and then "Zzzong!" drop the curve on you quick? Or just suddenly crowds you with anger.

Quite in reverse - let's look at it on the reverse side - we find out that if A accepts B's protest as A's own protest and A suddenly says, "Gee, that is pretty bad; we'd better do something about that," all of a sudden B is off guard and finds himself as an ally of A exerting effort against the counter-efforts of the environment. And no fight's possible! This is responsibility. The column of responsibility which you'll find in the handbook is strictly that estimation of effort, estimation of counter-effort and the acceptance of ownership.

You see, if you retaliate in tone, you will push them back down to where you didn't want them in the first place and undo your own work.

Do you realize, for instance, that an individual who nails down a piece of real estate, yard by a yard or a mile by a mile, and says, "That's mine," the moment he puts a fence around it, he has disowned all the efforts outside that fence and they will immediately hit the fence as counter-efforts.

Now remember, you're being agreeable with this preclear, you're in affinity with this preclear and so forth, and so you can be taken very much by surprise by it. Because your tone - you're estimating their tone as apathy, so in being agreeable with them, you are actually to some slight degree putting yourself in apathy. And you've brought them up the Tone Scale and they suddenly hammer apathy with anger. And so it comes down on you rather heavily sometimes if you don't understand this clearly.

So that the basic law of earth happens to be concerned with water and land and fencing it off. That's the basic of all law: water rights and land rights.

Now, if you get a preclear up over 2.0, you're sailing. Of coursg, you have to be prepared for the 2.5 band. And the 2,5 band says "Well, I'm getting along fine anyhow; there isn't much use to it. I don't know why we're putting in all this work. I guess it's all run out anyhow right now; it's all done - as much as can be done. There isn't much use in going on. I haven't - there isn't much to live for anyway, but if you don't care, it doesn't matter."

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

Of course, that's a sort of a mixture of - it sounds like apathy to you - it sounds like they're back down at the bottom. They're not. They're just hitting 2.5.

In other words, the acceptance of an individual of the efforts of the MEST universe determines directly the amount of counter-effort which the individual is going to receive from the MEST universe. The degree to which he accepts the universe as his own effort is the degree to which he will not receive counter-efforts.

Then they'll start in on this level: "Well, there's uh, uh - oh, it's fine. It's run out. It's run out. Oh, I'm so sick of running this. Why do I have to go through it again? I have to run out - it's - I'm tired of it." They're at 2,5 - and just a hair above.

And this is very interesting on this basis. This is quite conclusive as this concept is very solid; it's not very nebulous. One day a fellow had been - oh, had been just in terrible condition and he'd been threatening around and so on, and he was going to do so-and-so and so-and-so. And somebody had told me he was on the phone, and so I - "Oh, so-and-so. Oh, yeah. Well, let's see, I think I will accept him one hundred percent as an effort." I'll take full responsibility for anything he does and says, in other words, and postulated this, picked up the phone and talked to him. Didn't even say anything very sensible to him and he cooled off immediately, and within twenty-four hours had accomplished a couple of items that I had been wanting to get accomplished, without my even bringing it up. Now his anger just went by the boards.

Now, the next time you run the incident through on them, they're liable to be up - or the next time you see them in the session - they're liable to be up a little bit more than that so that they are being flippant and are apparently really up there high, you know?

Now, if people desire acceptance - you see, a desire for being accepted, that's a very nebulous thing; it has not been defined.

They're talking about Mother and they're saying, "Well, the old lady does so-and-so and then, of course, after she soaks my head in a barrel of boiling tar, so forth, why, then we go on with the rest of the accident, and so forth, and that's all there is to the incident." And you're supposed to say, "Ha-ha-ha," and let it go because there can't be any more to it. Oh no! You see, the incident you were running was this individual getting burned or something, and Mama dropped the grease on it and it felt hot or something. They have made a remark which indicates there is still content to the incident.

Accepted. Well, accepted by society. What's society supposed to do? Write you a license to survive or something? What do you want the society to do to accept you? You want the society to use as their effort your effort. That is acceptance. The acceptance of an individual, then, by a group is the group's signification of its willingness to employ the efforts of that individual as a group effort.

Now, how you get that without really crowding him and saying, "Look, you're still talking out of your aberrations" - you don't want to tell preclears that. They're practically doing nothing else but talking out of their aberrations when you first get ahold of them, but that's the point. You don't want to validate this.

And by the way, almost the whole field of group management grows out of that law. The whole field of contribution, and what you do about contributions, grow out of that.

"Well, let's run it again just to make sure." And then they'll run this incident which suggested actually getting their head boiled in tar or something. They meant this to be very flippant.

One of the primary things wrong with early organizations with which I had any vague connection at all was the fact that their management did not accept the efforts of others but contested the efforts of others, even to a point of violence. And so nobody was accepted by these organizations, and their management, and so on, rather caved them in in this fashion, because they got the counter-efforts.

When they come up to a complete release on the incident, it is funny. It's funny. They'll laugh about it. They're liable to laugh about it far beyond anything you ever expected to be laughed. That is sometimes very, very discouraging to an auditor when he can't stop a preclear from laughing. Because it will sound to the preclear's family like he's suddenly gone into hysterical mania of some sort and has gone completely insane because he can't stop laughing. And the laughter seems to be rather strained to them and forced because it's awfully loud and "he never laughed before."

What do you do to a revolutionary? If you were a government and you were beset at every hand by wild revolutionaries, how would you handle them? Would you shoot them? Mm-mm. Would you reprimand them? Mm-mm. Would you put out a lot of propaganda against them? Mm-mm.

This preclear is practically blowing his whole life and he's blowing it at umpteen decibels. That is a line charge. And I have seen preclears go on a line charge for days and days and days. The longest line charge I think I've seen offhand is about seven days. Once in a while, the old Foundation used to get somebody up to four or five hours, sometimes ten hours, sometimes twenty-four hours - rarely anything beyond that. It's very beneficial. If you can get a preclear started on a line charge, you show him any word, any phrase, and he will promptly start to go out on another blast of laughter. What he's doing is blowing the whole chain of associations.

You find out exactly where they're located and who they are, and you publish a public proclamation to the effect that you're terrifically anxious to contact them because they might have some ideas and can be of some help. And then you explain to these people what your problems are and ask them to look it over, look over your situation, and see how their ideas can forward the general good of the entire group. And having received their ideas and having them now with a clear view of what you're up against, you take an area of action and give it to them. And there would never have been a revolution on the face of the earth if management or government had always done this. You see how this could be?

If you start feeding him things that are very sad, he will laugh even harder. So you say, "Well now, look, Look, take this seriously. Let's be serious" - reverse vector on him, see. He's laughing: you're trying to get him to be serious. And the more you try to get him to be serious, the harder he'll laugh, by the way. And you say, "All right, now, let's remember something sad. Let's remember the time your mother almost died."

Of course, when one is below 2.0, one desires to succumb. And what is the fastest way to succumb? To select out all one's potential efforts and elect them counter-efforts, and one will succumb in a hurry. That's a speedy process. Anybody who tries to help you, don't let them; anybody who comes up and says a kind word to you, make them understand that it was an unkind word; anybody who wishes to use the same things you're using, make it clear to them they can't.

"Oh, yeah? Ha-ha." And then off into another roaring spin of laughter.

And if you go into this thoroughly enough and if you did it very broadly and very suddenly, you could probably manage to succumb in a matter of an hour or two. I don't know why people use pistols for suicides. Once you know this law, you can commit suicide almost immediately. Of course, you don't determine how painful it will be, but you could actually elect out enough efforts all around you to generate sufficient counter-efforts. You see, all you're doing is you are taking those efforts and you are making counter-efforts out of them, and of course they'll fly right back at you the second that you've twisted them around. Bang! And then you're in horrible condition.

What's he laughing about? Well, he's laughing off sudden relief from the recognition of the fact that his mother didn't die. He'll express it in some other way. And you keep a preclear rolling on this.

What does the body do when it starts to disintegrate as a person goes down the Tone Scale? Little by little and piece by piece and organ by organ and joint by joint, the individual stops accepting the activity of that area on behalf of the individual and elects it to be activity against the individual in that area, one way or another, and so this part is no longer part of the group and it'll start to work right straight against the individual.

Now, another thing that will happen to an auditor is you get a preclear halfway through an incident and the preclear starts to scream. Now, preclears can scream. Don't disabuse yourself of the idea that a preclear won't scream. A preclear screams.

I imagine you could school somebody into this whereby he could create almost any disease at will. You could keep saying, "Well, my left ear doesn't belong to me. My left ear doesn't belong to me. My left ear hurts me all the time. It's got a buzzing in it and I don't like it; it's not shapely," and keep on making it very plain that your left ear is not your effort but your counter-effort, and it will develop abscesses and rot off and give you brain fever, or do most anything for you.

I had a preclear one time start screaming at two o'clock in the morning. Came in, leaned on the doorjamb, almost collapsed in my arms - was in horrible shape, he said, and I ran him - just started to lock-scan off the data. And he ran right straight into the incident which an auditor had nicked but hadn't run. This fellow was in terrible shape anyhow. He was a psychotic.

You see how this is? This tells you immediately something about the physiological state of individuals. An individual handles himself much as he handles his environment. Because himself, meaning his body, is also part of his environment, is also part of the MEST universe. And an individual handles his body and its actions much as he handles the MEST universe. So you can watch an individual handling things in the MEST universe and know how he's handling himself.

But ran into the beginning of this incident and started to scream. The windows were down, it was two o'clock in the morning, and the complaint came from two blocks away.

If, for instance, he wrecks all the cars he drives and he ruins this and he ruins that, you know that he's also potentially sick or he is already sick, one way or the other, from something or other. If you look at him and you see how he cares for himself or how he grooms himself or how he doesn't groom himself, he will do the same thing as that to the MEST universe around him, because he'll handle it as he handles himself. Therefore, you can make an estimation of how the individual will handle something for you by watching him handle himself; because he will handle it just the same either way, because we're on the principle of how you handle efforts. Do you elect them as efforts? Do you elect them as counter-efforts? Does this individual elect his clothes as counter-efforts?

You talk about volume of sound? A human being can't make that much sound, that's all there is to it! It's completely ear-shattering, nerve-shattering, R-r-r-r-r,r-r! What sound volume you'll run into with some of these.

You know, nearly everybody in the society, by the way, in his - any early childhood of his life has - in any early childhood has had the adults around him electing clothes as a counter-effort to the child.

Sit there and cover up your ears and say, "Go over it again." That's kind of rough for bn auditor to face, by the way - a screamer.

You know, "You can't wear your shoes today, you have to wear those other shoes and those are the shoes which you wear Sunday; and you must take care of your clothes and you keep getting the knees knocked out of these breeches; or you keep tearing your dress, and you must take care of that dress," and so on and so on and so on. And they're saying, "Your clothes, your shoes are counter-efforts, your shoes are counter-efforts, your clothes are counter-efforts, your clothes are counter-efforts." And all of a sudden the individual gets the idea that clothes are counter-efforts. And after that he sort of fights them. And you'll see him wearing collars which are much too tight for him. You will see him wearing shoes which hurt him, and so on. He's elected them as counter-efforts and they'll act that way. He says, "My shoes hurt me," so he'll make sure to buy shoes that hurt him. He's got to prove it.

Or a terror charge: A terror charge can be so great that it will actually make the bed chatter up and down against the floor. An anger charge can be so heavy that a preclear is liable to bang his fist right straight through a wall. Been done many times. A preclear may be so involved in the incident he's running, he's so completely unaware of his environment, he is utterly revivified in the incident, that he'll start banging his head against the wall, actually maiming himself. Well, of course, what you ought to do is .. Well, it's a good thing to try to interpose a pillow between himself and the wall.

Because the factor standing behind this thing is he - no one can be wrong. You can't be wrong - the mind has got to be right; it's made to be right and so forth. So if the individual has elected his shoes as a counter-effort, now he - if he's done that already, now, when he gets comfortable shoes they won't be a counter-effort, will they? So he'll be wrong.

And a preclear will roll back and forth on the bed sometime. You as an auditor, by the way, go through terrific gyrations watching the preclear do this and do that, because you'll brace yourself, you see, to keep the preclear from rolling off the bed, and you'll reduce your own vocal cords to keep his from bursting and you'll try to make tears come in your eyes to make him cry and all sorts of weird things. You'll pick up his somatics so he can get rid of them. And by the way, you'll turn on your own somatics so that you can get his on. You try and try and try to turn on his somatics, his somatics, his somatics, and all of a sudden your own come on. His don't.

It isn't whether he'd be more comfortable or less comfortable, or better looking or less looking, it's just will he be wrong or right? Well, he said, "My shoes are counter-efforts. Nobody ever let me own my shoes and nobody ever did anything for me with shoes. And therefore, these shoes are counter-efforts."

And in short, in short, you can really work at this, and when you have engrams - particularly Facsimile One and so on - in place yourself, why, you've just got to be prepared to go through a little more hell than you would ordinarily expect in the routine business of living.

Well, the way shoes are counter-efforts is they hurt you. Well, so the only kind of shoes you can buy are shoes which hurt you. Now, this is obvious, isn't it?

But at no time should an auditor ever back down - should an auditor ever back down! At no time should an auditor ever fail to finish off an incident regardless of the mood, words or emotion of the preclear.

And then because you don't want anybody to suspect to any degree that you are worried in the slightest about whether you're right or wrong - since that in itself is a confession that you might not be right - you have to get up a big explanation of why it is that you wear these shoes that are too tight.

You realize that people low on the Tone Scale - below 4.0 - have a great deal of difficulty in committing overt acts. Auditing looks like an overt act. Maybe someplace, maybe you killed some girl or a cat or something and it screamed and you were sorry for it afterwards. The preclear starts to scream, and all of a sudden you get the idea that you're committing an overt act against the preclear. So you haul off and try to make it up to the preclear by patching him up somehow or another instead of letting him scream.

And you say, "Well, there's a gangster in New York that I admire very much who wears shoes with these double-pointed toes like this and they're very stylish and so on, and that's the style and that's why I wear them." Which is a cover-up and an effort to get away from having to say, "I'm wrong. I may be wrong because I may not be right concerning these shoes. Therefore, I've got to have a big explanation; therefore, I have to have justification for having elected something to be a counter-effort." And follow that very closely. Now, get this next step.

You have to be willing as an auditor to butcher that preclear - just butcher him from a standpoint of letting him scream, letting him run somatics, letting him hurt, letting him emote and so on. That is not an overt act.

When the individual elects a counter-effort, he has to have a reason to keep from being wrong. Of course, it is basically a hundred percent wrong to elect anything to be a counter-effort. But to keep from being wrong one has to have a reason. So what one does is claim that the shoes have committed an overt act against him, so that he's justified in committing an overt act back against the shoes by electing the shoes as being a counter-effort. Well, you see, it's a circular problem.

It'll just be some old overt act of your own against another dynamic which will go into restim sometimes in running a preclear. It makes you appear to be in the position of an offender. The reaction of an offender is to try to regret it and make it up to. And, of course, that's sympathy and that'll ruin your preclear!

So, when an individual goes into a fight with somebody else, he becomes very concerned with the fact that he did not elect this counter-effort to be a counter-effort of his own volition. Somebody else elected it as a counter-effort and now he has to suffer for it.

So sometimes you'll be running this incident and the preclear will go into a terror charge and start to scream .. And what do you do?

In other words, he is receiving an overt act - he's proving that he himself is receiving this overt act. Therefore, he is justified in fighting back against the shoes; he's now justified in anything he does to the shoes. He's justified in electing them a counter-effort; he's justified in fighting with an effort the counter-effort.

You say, "My God, here I am making him scream. I guess I'm choking him," which is what you did some - at some earlier time to somebody.

Now, this is - should tell you a great deal about the human mechanism - mental activity with regard to the MEST universe. You see, unfortunately, if there were no counter-efforts of any kind whatsoever, you wouldn't have any action at all. You wouldn't have a bit of action.

And you say, "Well, um, um, uh, are there any locks on this? Are there any locks on this? Is there any present time locks on this?" And the preclear will say, "Yeah. Hm, yeah," He'll stop screaming. "Yeah, there's a present time lock on this," "What happened?"

And so, what would you do for action? What would you do for it? There wouldn't be anything for it. You'd have to go find another universe.

"Well, I saw this little girl scream. Yeah. I think Mother was taking a sliver out of her finger and she was screaming. That's right." "Well, begin at the beginning of this lock."

But what would you do with that other universe? You'd say, "Well, it's a counter-effort to this universe, so we'll have to lick it."

Whoohh. And you feel this terrific sensation of relief inside yourself. "Gosh, I guess I got out of that."

Now, when you say, "All these counter-efforts around here are my efforts," you will actually cut down your own level of action - necessary action. Now, it's by the way very desirable to cut it down in order to go up Tone Scale to a certain degree. But above that level you've got to be in a position where you are free to elect your counter-efforts.

Yeah, you got out of it, but you left the preclear in a terror charge. You can make people pretty sick doing this to them. Run it through! Bull it through! Slam it through! One way or the other.

What do we elect as a counter-effort? Do we elect another man as a counter-effort? Do we elect animals as counter-efforts? Do we elect the effort of life in surviving as a counter-effort? It's all very irrational, isn't it? No, about the only safe, really safe counter-effort to elect - only real safe effort to turn into a counter-effort - is the MEST universe. And if a person will fight the MEST universe and bring alignment into the MEST universe, he can have lots of action and stay way up Tone Scale because he's only down on one dynamic, which is not, strictly speaking, a dynamic of thought but is a dynamic of the material universe. So he is at liberty to fight the universe.

The best remedy for an auditor, of course, is to be in a frame of mind where he's willing to commit any overt act in order to get the preclear well - -any overt act to get the preclear well. Frame of mind.

And as a matter of fact, an individual who will fight the universe and bring enormous alignment into the forces of the universe, who will bring things into being - orderly, helpful being - out of the physical universe, is generally in pretty good shape. And he's generally accepted as doing something good.

By the way, that frame of mind of rather - even flippant determination - "Well, go ahead, run it! So it'll kill you; go ahead, run it. You say your lungs are sore from screaming? Well now, let's see, let's see. Maybe if we ran that earlier incident, why, maybe you could really blow them out of your chest. Let's run it!" And you'd be surprised how many times a preclear who is low on the Tone Scale will respond to this and come up Tone Scale toward your level and run it. But you have to be willing to commit an overt act.

Now, whenever your physicist goes to work along this line and he triumphs along this line, everybody says, "Three cheers, three cheers, three cheers," and then somebody else comes along and elects this effort of the physicist as something to be used against life. And everybody says, "Oh, no, no, no, no, no." You see, that's wrong.

That doesn't mean that you actually will go out and get a baseball bat and hit him over the head with it. But if you were to think that hitting him over the head with a baseball bat would run out the incident and make him well, hit him over the head with a baseball bat. I mean, that's got to be your mood. "We're going to make this person well. Wham. The only thing that's making him sick is aberration. He wants to be well and I want him to be well. So what? Let's roll. He's going to get well, that's all there is to that." Surety. Consideration.

What you should do is take the atom bomb and turn it around against matter, energy, space and time. And you can do a lot with it. For instance, you could - oh, I'd hate to go into the number of things you could do with an atom bomb. But the last thing you want to do - very low Tone Scale - is to blow up other men with it. See, that's wrong.

You take a business which is managed by an individual who is afraid to hurt people. That business is going to fail. The employees are going to be unhappy and there's going to be a lot of people hurt. Lots of people are going to get hurt by somebody who is afraid to hurt people.

Now, the physical universe is chaos, and you bring alignment into this chaos, what are you doing? You're doing the basic action of life and that action is picking up pieces of force - bits of force, which might or might not be headed at you - and lining them up to hit more force in the physical universe, which might or might not be headed at you; to pick up that force and align it.

Now, the point I'm making is that you can hurt a lot of preclears by being afraid to hurt them. Because the only way you can hurt a preclear is to keep him from running incidents. And if you can restrain him enough from running incidents, if you can keep him from running that grief, if you can keep him from running off that terror, if you can keep him from throwing - going through these convulsions, why, you're all set. You've made him sick for keeps. Not that another auditor couldn't undo it. But you're liable to spoil his accessibility. And some other auditor is liable to have to pick this preclear uay up from the bottom. Why? Because you didn't want to hurt him. So you sympathized with him: that could be very serious. The Auditor's Code as contained in the book Science of Survival is a very, very good thing to know. There are two particular things that you must not do.

Now, what you're gaining there, is at first there's this random vectors of action around you - the chaos of the MEST universe. Now, you pick a little bit of that off and you say, "This force - this chaosness is a force and I am electing it into an effort. And now here it is as an effort."

You must not invalidate the preclear's data. You mustn't tell him "Oh, that's dub-in, Let's run something real. Oh, you know better than to run that; let's run something else."

By the way, you do this by making a theta facsimile of it. Therefore, you get enough theta facsimiles of this and you know all of a sudden the basic law of it. Now you've made that into an effort. Now, you've elected a whole lot of other things out here as potentially counter-efforts, but you make them strike this effort which you have in such a way that any time they hit it, they come around and become from a counter-effort into an effort. So your effort gets bigger and bigger and stronger and stronger and more and more aligned.

How do you know it isn't real? You're not inside his head. You haven't lived his life.

An engineer can whip a river if he uses the forces of the river to lick the river. But an engineer can't whip a river by destroying a river, because that wasn't what he was trying to do in the first place. He was probably trying to make a dam or he's trying to do something else. But if he uses the force of the river to lick the river, why, he will win. But if he uses the force of the river to drown men, he won't win. And if he uses the force of the river to fix it so nobody can ever fix the river, he won't win.

Of course, if he runs eighteen train wrecks that all happened in the same year and you know that he's been living in the country and there were no trains, you can assume that what he is running has some slight questionability. But don't be sure of it to the extent where you'll invalidate him. No, get him off the subject of train wrecks, that's all - just get him off the subject of train wrecks.

For instance, if he starts a war in North China and lets the dikes out of the Yellow River to drown Japanese troops - and incidentally a few million Chinese civilians - nobody, not even the fellow who did it, thought it was a good action. The Yellow River went whipping across North China and wrecking enormous areas because the Yellow River had to be very carefully diked - very carefully. It was flowing many feet above its - the actual level of the plain around it. It was depositing silt until it had climbed into the air. And it was an artificial river, actually, flowing way up there in the air, carefully sandbagged.

Female voice: quite a brilliant lecture.

Japanese troops start in. The first thing anybody can think of, of course, is "Let's drown them all." So they knock out the Yellow River and, in addition to that, don't bother to repair its dikes again in any way, shape or form. And for years that Yellow River went whipping back and forth across the plains of North China, not settling down into anything.

Don't invalidate his data, that's all. He will suffer every time his data is invalidated.

It didn't do anybody a single bit of good. The Japanese empire is whipped where it needn't ever have gone to war*war in North China; reference to the war between china and Japan that began with a Japanese invasion of China in 1937 and ended with the World War II defeat of Japan in 1945. The United States supported China's position in the war, and publicly protested Japan's air raids and bombing of Chinese civilians. Yellow River; a river (also called the Hwang Ho River) in north central and eastern China. The river gets its name from the yellow silt it picks up along its course. Silt deposits also elevate the river bed (in places sixty to seventy feet above the countryside) and necessitate raising the river's dike. If the pressure of water in the channel becomes abnormally high, the dikes may be breached and masses of water cascaded over a large area; this has happened so frequently that the river is called "China's Sorrow." Its course has shifted many times through the centuries, vitally affecting thirty-five million acres of rich farmland. In June of 1938, the dikes of the Yellow River burst, causing catastrophic floods. Among the hundreds of thousands of people drowned were 6,000 Japanese troops, part of a force that had successfully invaded and occupied several major Chinese cities. The Chines were accused of blasting the dikes to stop the Japanese offensive, a charge which they denied. The course of the river changed as a result, and did not return to its previous bed until 1947. and the United States government has lost a great deal which it never need have lost if it had ever talked to the Japanese government about it, instead of electing the Japanese government to be a counter-effort; and as far as China is concerned, her surging effort against the Japanese laid her wide open for the communists, and she lost everything.

Now, you run this incident out of the preclear, you run this incident where he just is bound and determined to run this time that the car ran over him when he was four years old. Father backed out of the garage and ran over him with the car. And he's just determined to run this incident. He's just not going to hear of anything else but he's got to run this incident.

So, you see, stemming out from this irrationality of electing man as counter-effort, you lose control of the physical universe; because it takes the aligned vectors of all men to lick the physical universe, so it's a laudable goal. But man fighting man, we know that's wrong because you go back downhill. Using the physical universe's laws to fight man is aiding and abetting the physical universe against man - no matter which side you're on. Can you see how that is?

You see, this was a time when Father did something to him and he wants to show you that he is justified in doing what he did to Father or to fathers in general.

Now, you can see how far conceptually and how much you can understand and know about behavior from the standpoint of effort alone. What is effort? What do you elect as effort? What is going to be your effort? What are you saying is counter-effort?

So he wants to run this incident. Well, let him run the incident. Don't cause a big roar about it. After all, probably a wheel passed over his leg and it was amputated - something mild, not like these big, early incidents that really fixed him up thetawise. I'm being facetious when I say run over his leg. That probably would be a slightly serious incident because he'd be without his leg and this would be a restimulator of it. And his chances of growing a leg in his present aberrated state are zillch. Now, I'm not saying that he could grow a leg if he were in any other kind of a state; not saying he couldn't either.

Your goals, and the whole problem of goals, is actually nothing more than your or your preclear's idea about which efforts he is going to elect as counter-efforts and which counter-efforts he's going to make into efforts. And that's goals. And there's no more to goals than that, by the way. That is the common denominator of all goals.

Anyway he wants to run this incident, so you start him through the incident and you let him run the incident. And he runs it out, and finally it gets up to very clear reality and he's in beautiful shape about this incident, he likes this incident, he thinks this incident is fine, And he goes home and he talks to his mother on the telephone who lives in Sioux Falls and happens to be at 1,2 on the Tone Scale. And he says, "You know the time that Dad ran over me? You know, you had a coat that was a green coat with purple spots, and so forth. And I got all this data back there - four - and I got a look inside the house and all those pictures you had of angels -"

And you're going to get some preclear to straighten out his goals? All you have to do is start out with him and start asking him, "Let's see, what is bucking you?" "What may get in at you?" and "What can you do to fight back at this?" - will make him realize, on an evaluation level, of what to do with goals.

And Mother says, "You know, I didn't have any pictures of angels then. They were acquired when you were eight."

But there's something more important than that. When did he first elect of his own free self-determined will to have his present enemies as counter-efforts? His recognition of this, by the way, is likely to clear up his whole problem of goals and will certainly clear up his uncertainty about present time. He realizes all of a sudden this horrible, insidious fact - as I'll cover in a later talk - he did it himself.

And he says, "Yeah but I ran this incident and this old Maxwell4 car was going bop-bop, crunch, bop-bop, cr - ,"

You elect these things to be counter-efforts when you should have elected them to be efforts, and sooner or later they're going to cause you trouble.

"Your father didn't buy a Maxwell car till 1921."

Now, on the very technical application side of effort and counter-effort you will find that you are working with, in facsimiles, the facsimile or the picture of old efforts and counter-efforts as they were exerted on the individual. And this is very, very easy to understand.

He completely overlooks the fact that Maxwell cars were not made in 1921; they were discontinued earlier, I think. I think the car by that time had become the Hat-in-the-Ring car or the Rickenbacker or something. I've forgotten exactly what it was, but so has Mama. And boy, has she forgotten? She's much older than your preclear, and she was not hurt during that sequence to amount to anything, and her data on it is not particularly reliable.

Here is the individual standing there, trying to remain at a state of rest, and a baseball hits him. And the baseball tells him he's got to move, but he is determined to stay in a state of rest, so he doesn't move, so the baseball hits him, and because he doesn't move, the baseball doesn't go through him - he gets a black eye. The baseball was a counter-effort and his effort was to stand still when the baseball hit him.

But, she may not like the preclear to know: something in her tells her that it's dangerous for this boy to know all this stuff. So she'll just automatically start slapping him back, slapping him back, on everything he says.

And when you run the facsimile, you'll find this: you'll find his effort to stand still and the baseball's effort to knock him out. And you will find something very interesting, his determination to stand still happened a little bit before the ball hit him. But it certainly was reconfirmed the second the ball did hit him - for the first moment.

"But the car came out of the garage and ran over me, and we had Dr. Watson."

And though he apparently was hit in the eye by a baseball and fell down promptly and will tell you that he was knocked down by the baseball, what actually happened was this: the baseball hit him and the first instant of impact he leaned into the baseball! He actually hit the baseball with his eye. And he hit it hard. He leaned right straight into the baseball, held on with every fiber of his being, trying to vanish the baseball, and went down Tone Scale on the whole thing as he realized that it was a counter-effort. But he tried to make it into an effort one way or the other or get ahold of it or assimilate this thing hitting him, and as a result there we have a black eye.

And she says, "Well, lookit, there was a car that did run over you, dear, but it didn't go all the way over you, and your father was very sorry about it. And that happened when you were nine. And your father was very sorry about it, and as a matter of fact, we made it up to you. We bought you a new bicycle because of it. And the car didn't run over you, hut you were so frightened you merely thought it did. And so, ha-ha, we didn't commit any overt act against you. We didn't commit any overt act against you. We didn't do this. We didn't do thia We didn't do this." This is all she's saying. "Get off the subject," she says. "Get off - hehheh - let's talk about something else. I mean this isn't valid." He comes back to you and you try to run him and you find out the sonic he had is gone. The visio he had is gone. His recalls now cease at the age of sixteen and he can't remember anything earlier. Great?

And when you run this black eye, you will find out that the individual is tending to remain at a state of rest. He's doing one of three things: He's tending to remain at a state of rest no matter what hits him, and the first moment after something tries to keep him from being at a state of rest, he will try to keep on being in a state of rest.

But the invalidation of a past life: If you run Effort Processing indiscriminatehi on a preclear, you're going to run him into a past life, I don't care who he is. If he's the most materialistic science [scientist] on the face of tile earth today, by giving him about three ordinary simple routine efforts to run, I would wind him up in a past life.

If you don't know this little point, you're liable to miss the first of a facsimile. And it will be the most important part; it'll contain most of the pain. It didn't hurt him after he went along with this force of the baseball. But when he's tried to say, "There is no baseball" and completely vanish a baseball with his right eye, he wasn't going about it with the proper mystic symbols or something (laughter) and he got a black eye; he failed.

There he would be in the crowd watching Benjamin Franklin fly the kite or something. And he'd say, (sniff?) "Gee, I guess I'm imagining a lot of this, and so forth."

All right. Next step: The individual is trying to remain in a state of motion. He's walking down the street, let us say, and somebody has laid a two-by-four across the sidewalk at shin height. And he continues on walking down the street and he hits the two-by-four with his shin. He tries to keep on walking for the first moment after the - he hits the two-by-four. His shin tries to keep on going into the two-by-four. The two-by-four just didn't viciously hit him and knock the shin back and his shin was completely innocent, and so forth - that sort of thing. What he's got to do is go right straight on in and he's - tries to go straight through the two-by-four.

And you say, "Well, now, Let's move back to the time you fall off the horse," just assuming that he probably fell off a horse in that life - horses being what they are.

And he finds out he isn't quite up enough on his going through holes in space or something. And at this moment he conceives the idea that he'd better have a somatic - a pain. And then he'd better get his shin back away from that. And then he elects the two-by-four as being at fault and says "that two-by-four," then he says "the guy that put the two-by-four there," and then it's the world in general and the universe in particular, and he just spreads this whole thing out as a counter-effort as his tone comes up again, and then it comes back down again after his shin stops hurting and he's all right.

So he goes - all of a sudden he says, "Oh, you know, I've got a terrible headache!" And let's say, "Well, let's run the incident and fall off the horse." So he falls off the horse. And we find out that it's Derby day at Boston or something and his name was Arman and his folks lived at 322 Back Bay and he's got all the dope and it's getting realer and realer and realer,

So you can see an individual through one pain of this character go through the whole Tone Scale and up again. Now what happened then was the MEST universe, or some part of the MEST universe, or some other - any counter-effort, was in this case motionless and the individual was trying to move. And the motionlessness, relative motionlessness of this two-by-four disturbed the individual's self-determined effort to keep on moving. So an individual's tendency to remain in a state of motion was upset by a motionlessness in the physical universe.

It tells him something very interesting. It tells him suddenly, "I haven't lived just one life."

Now, an individual is walking in a certain direction and some - a snowball hits him on the shoulder and tries to make him walk in another direction, you see, tries to curve him off. The first thing he will try to do is keep on course. And his effort to keep on course compounds with the effort to resist this snowball, and you'll find him actually backing into the snowball for the first moment. He'll get a reaction toward that snowball.

The greatest horrible trick that you could pull on any individual would convince him that he goes through all of this just once and he never has another chance. That he's born into the world and then he dies. And after he's dead, he's dead forever. He'll never have it again.

Even if a person's in apathy, there is still enough residual cellular tone to cause him to resist the snowball. And that's what pain is. It's the individual's unwillingness to be changed from a state of rest to a state of motion by a counter-effort, or an individual's unwillingness to alter his state of motion into a state of not motion because of a counter-effort, or an individual's effort to remain in a steady course despite a dissuading, disturbing or otherwise "uncoursifying" effort. Do you get this whole idea? That's all there is to it.

Anything he loses then is terribly important to him; anything which he fails in will be most horribly regretted. You can keep an individual down at the bottom of the Tone Scale by proving to him that he only takes one crack at it, that he is - has no survival as a personal identity of any kind whatsoever.

When you run out these counter-efforts, you'll find that the counter-effort is a distinct effort. And you'll also find out incidentally that your preclear can go around and be the counter-effort. He can be the snowball. He could actually go to this point - you never ask him to do this - but he could actually be the snowball flying through the air and hitting the shoulder. He can be the snowball, hit the snowball and he can get the snowball's somatics? Of course, he's never basically responsible for the material universe. I mean, he could have never been an effort of the physical universe at all. Nonsense!

Now, I'm talking to you - demonstrable phenomena. I'm talking to you about this, because it's very, very important that you establish to your own great satisfaction the existence of previous existences, before you demonstrate to anyone that you don't want them to exist by telling others they don't want to exist.

That is a ridiculous line to go down on, but I want you to realize that the individual can be the counter-effort. You don't have to keep him standing there in valence - don't keep insisting he stay in valence and keep getting hit by this snowball. Bring him around and let him be the snowball's effort. Let him have the snowball. And you'll see an individual after a while after you are running this snowball hitting him, he says, "Well, I - it tried to turn me."

In other words, let's not further the control mechanism, because there is no single proof of any kind at all that an individual lives only once. There's no proof! And there is ample, adequate phenomena and proof that an individual lives on and on and on and on. We have phenomena; we have proof; it shows up on any lie detector. Any policeman operating any lie detector on any criminal could have asked him this question, "Have you ever lived before?" and the lie detector will say "Bop! Yes."

And you say, "All right. Now, let's get the force turning you." If you were to say, "Be the force turning you," he would actually sit there, and you'd see him on the couch doing little shoves at the shoulder - shoves at the shoulder. And he's getting the somatic in the place where he was hit. But he also has some kind of a strange concept of being what hit him.

This phenomena has been lying there right on the surface. It's something that people won't look at. Because they've been taught otherwise. So, the individual runs this past death, he runs this past life. All of a sudden he recognizes something like a bolt of lightning. His recalls are suddenly repaired all up and down the track and he suddenly says, "You know, I've lived a lot of times!" Gee, that means to him he'll live again. That means to him he'll have another chance. It's like taking a condemned man out of a cell and saying, "There's sunlight!"

If you were to develop that up in full, you'd find out he really was all the time anyhow, so it didn't matter.

Then he runs into some snide character around someplace that's saying, "There ain't nobody ever lived before and everybody knows." That's the best explanation, you see, everybody knows nobody ever lived before. "And besides, you're talking about the Roman Empire, and I'll have you know that the Roman Empire failed in the year 221 and after that waslrun exclusively by the Phoenicians, and besides that, that society was superseded by the Egyptians and that's where Masonry came from," and so on.

Nothing equals infinity equals nothing and we all agreed on it a long time ago that there was something, so you see, it's very simple. Of course, I'11 let Einstein do the mathematics on it (laughter). He's welcome to them.

It doesn't matter how crazy the reasoning is, the fact that somebody is hammering and pounding at this individual and telling him, "you didn't! You didn't! You didn't!" They're not saying, "That past life doesn't exist." They're saying to him, "You belong in a deep, dark cell where you'll never see any sunlight again - you'll never have another chance!"

All right. That is, in effect, the whole subject of effort, and actually about all you need to know about it.

And what they're saying to him is not just telling him he's a liar or that he's wrong; they're saying to him, "You're dead when you are dead and you're going to be dead forever. And every little input of action that you're making into this society is lost. There is no use for it. You're not preparing anything for your own future. Go on back in that dungeon and close that door and live in the dark, fellow" That's what they're telling him. And the preclear's tone will dive on an invalidation of a past life like a rocket plane - kawham!

You'll run some simplicity, some simple efforts, and you will find out very soon the varieties that I've named are the varieties. There's just those combinations of individuals trying to remain in a state of rest or trying to remain in a state of motion, the counter-efforts trying to remain in a state of rest or a state of motion and these conflicts produce - with those additional two change items - these conflicts produce all the pain and the somatics and the conflict that an individual is capable of having anywhere in his entire bank.

There's only one thing you should do then in regard to these things: run them up to such a high level of reality that they can't be invalidated. And you be very careful about invalidating preclears when they start to run something odd, peculiar and strange.

Okay, let's take a breather on this.

There was a poor kid back in Elizabeth that all the staff was having a lot of firn with. And do you know what he was running? He was running a past life on Mars. And do you know, that's - of course, is impossible, except for one thing: in very sane preclears lately I've been hitting a life on Mars.

And they almost spun this kid in. He had a good chance of going right out and coming right back to battery and being in good shape, and they butchered him with this invalidation.

What data were they operating from? No data except the desire to be vicious! Of course, Facsimile One tells you that you only live once. You're not supposed to know!

And the other one that's very important is, don't evaluate your preclear's data for him. You're there to make him think, not to do his thinking for him! And although it's very sweet of you to say, "Well, oh, you - ;you remember the incident you ran the other day?" And he says, "Well, yes, I .. "

And you say, "You know, the one you ran with the car and getting run overwhen you were four years of age, and you remember the angels and so forh?" And he said, "Yeah, Well, I wasn't thinking that "Well," you say, "you know you thought it was very real." Data, data, data, data, data, data, data - feed him. And watch him go down the Tone Scale.

What you're doing is the same trick a lot of people have done to him, is you're saying, "You can't think or evaluate for yourself. I have to think and evaluate and remember for you."

You go into a family where the husband, for instance, isn't doing well, and you'll very often find his wife anxiously answering all the questions you put to the husband - anxiously doing so - even though you're only talking socially with the husband. You say, "Well, I bet it was something like that in 1918." And he says, "Well, as a matter of fact ..."

And she says, "Well, as a matter of fact it - it was pretty bad, wasn't it, dear?"

All of his opinions - she's feeding in opinions before he can express one. And this fellow will be in bad shape!

You as an auditor can push the preclear down the Tone Scale by telling the preclear what to think about what. You don't care what he thinks about it.

And the easiest way not to evaluate for him is not to care what he evaluates. Because if you're doing your job, he'll evaluate automatically.

And your job is to put him into a situation where he can evaluate, not to evaluate for him.

The two ways that you can ruin a preclear is to evaluate for him, and on the other hand, invalidate him.

And the only thing which you can do wrong as an action is to be a coward and fail to let him run on through the incident because you're scared.

Those three things, then, in the attack on the preclear assume enormous importance, and you should pay very great attention to the Auditor's Code in general.

Thank you very much.