This is the afternoon of August [October] the 12th.

And here we have a discussion of the technique we were talking about this morning, which is to say Step II of Standard Operating Procedure 8. And our discussion could concern itself with what you have observed directly, of course, but it also should first concern itself with what difficulty, if any, you have with the technique, or what question you have about the technique or any question remains in your mind concerning the technique.

Before I go into that, however, I'm going to - I remember an old gag. One day a rooster had been outside the barnyard. The rooster was pushing an ostrich egg. And he pushed this ostrich egg to the barnyard fence - he pushed this big ostrich egg. And he got into the barnyard and all the hens gathered around. And he looked around him and he said, "I don't mean to complain, girls, but I wanted to show you what's being done elsewhere."

So this really isn't in that spirit. But ...

Well, what can happen? I had a year to make an organization out of nothing, and it got there. But I had a year to train and indoctrinate people and they fortunately started out straight up from SOP 1. And I actually released the first codified procedure in Great Britain with the first lecture which I made to British auditors. There was a little group there about twice the size of this group and we were able to push everything along pretty well and watch the results and see what happened. And it's really just begun to happen over there. But look at the - look at the techniques they're willing to use.

I'll read you some of these things.

This is a preclear who is seventy-six years of age - female. She had a pain in her right shoulder from a motor accident. She had rheumatism in the left leg and she had inflammation of the bladder due to an operation and it's - had endured for seven years. And lots of medical classification and the previous case history available. And the disability had not disabled her to a considerable extent but it had made her considerably uncomfortable very uncomfortable.

Well, these original report forms, the British - written down here is the number of hours in session. And this has been altered, in all the reports I receive these days, to minutes. And number of minutes in session: "Thirty minutes." The technique employed is Straightwire and Shifting Centers, Certainty and Step I - exteriorization. In other words, they did Straightwire, Shift Centers, Certainty, Step I and then they got her exteriorized. I don't know where this case was at the beginning, but it couldn't have been too far down the line, believe me.

Now, the technique workability or defects noted: "Excellent workability." And now we have the results noted - when discharged: "Wonderfully relaxed after processing. Pc returned home but a later letter states all is well." And the difference in appearance: "Can't tell as she is not in the area."

Well, that's one case of seventy-six. Everybody knows you can't do psychotherapy on a person above fifty.

Okay. Now, here we have a boy who's thirteen years old and he had asthma. Now, this is the beginning and a lot of these will start coming in on the asthma program because the HAS in Great Britain has simply set out to knock out asthma in Great Britain. "Had asthma especially in winter and caused by the east winds - and usually Christmas. And it's..." so on and so on, but it's, oh yes, "Tradition of asthma on the father's side and it's endured since birth." And the medical classification: "Asthma." Psychiatric classification (present doctor) - this evidently has something to do with psychiatry. And the extent that the disability has inhibited him: "His attack lasts for one or two weeks in bed." Otherwise, it didn't hit him hard. Number of - again, cross out - number of minutes in session: "Fifty-five." Technique employed: "Straightwire, Shift Centers, Wasting and Enforcing good air, also bad air”. And that was the routine procedure I laid down on asthma, with the fact that we had some Straightwire and Shifting Centers thrown in there too.

All right. Technique workability or defects noted: "Wasted good air five times and also enforced three times and then increased speed. And the fourth waste of bad air, rapid clouds of green, red, black, gray and white flew off; and enforced bad air as wavy fingers and bubbles included in second enforcement; and exteriorization - pam! Step I." Second session: "Second session was forty-five minutes of SSSA. Had to handle father's and mother's and brother's heads on opposite poles. Certain that winds and so forth will not cause him asthma and he looks more alert and happier. Meter wasting/enforcing air, the pc was not sure whether winds would give him asthma or not. Ran double terminals on 'Air gives me asthma - air doesn't give me asthma' and 'I want air' and 'I do not want air' and 'Birth gave me asthma - did not give me asthma.' And this gave him certainty on that and after that, why, he was certain winds didn't give him asthma."

Here's another one: "Thirteen. Male." No previous report. And he was "born with eczema and asthma. And asthma stopped at two years and left hay fever." And he's had this condition bad; been bad off since birth. He's had hay fever, no cure, the doctors had stated to him. All right. Psychiatric: Well, they didn't know. Extent disability has inhibited activity: "Allergy to cats, pollen and..." a couple other items here. Oh, my, my, my, here's a long list of things - here's a long list of things to which he's allergic. Number of - again crossed out - minutes in processing: "Fifty." "Straightwire, Shift Centers and Certainty on Troubled Parts ran twice, double terminals, on..." these various things on which he was allergic, such as cats and fish and eggs and so forth and so on. And then Step I - exterior.

You notice he's working this technique, by the way, backwards. He should be working it quite in reverse to this, but he's still getting there.

Technique workability or defects noticed: "Worked most positively. Strong tendency to go into an engram which he was kept from doing. And he appeared happier. And he put his head in a bush full of the pollen to which he is allergic and took several lungsful. It didn't even vaguely upset him."

Male voice: That's what you call certain.

Well, here is almost the identical case history: another thirteen-year-old boy. "Eczema at birth left asthma; acute in winter," and So on and so on and so on, winds, and so on, and medical classification: "Asthma." "Dislike of sleep during attack and attack lasts three or four days." And this again is thirty minutes. "Shift Centers, Straightwire, Certainty run twice on 'something here,' and so forth. Then Step I - exterior. Immediate certainty after process that the above would not give him asthma." Second session: "Forty-five minutes of SSSA. Had to handle Mother's head and own upside down. And he's alert and brighter."

Well, here's a male case: "Fifty-six. Pain in right thigh and knee, some rheumatism, but said it was due to a cut muscle in a fistula operation." And how long has this endured: "It's endured about seven years." And he's had operations. And the extent the disability has inhibited him: Well, he'd seize up and - after sitting - and so forth and various manifestations. Thirty minutes is the number of - amount of processing and his - technique was employed is Certainty on the Past and Step I - exterior. The technique workability or defects noted: "Excellent" and "No pain" - this is after difference in appearance - "No pain. Freedom from weather affecting the limb. Pc could not be sure for about ten days but now is so."

And - well, there's no reason to go on. I've got some more. But the point is that there is where your techniques are narrowing down.

Now, you have a tradition of long cases because you came in with Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health. Your viewpoint on cases is a long viewpoint. We haven't had that viewpoint in Great Britain. The auditor isn't sitting there with a postulate that he's going to have to work at it. As a result he works very short and snappy on the whole thing.

Now - gives you some idea that if you had a very positive approach on a technique and you just went right after it in a businesslike fashion, the Q-and-A factor of processing would be way up. See, you get that Q-and-A difference there. And more important than that, you would spend a little time sitting there sorting it out. You'd spend time before you processed rather than time during processing.

Just taking a look at the guy, you see he's rather heavily built, you see he's this, you see he's that. He talks for a little bit and doesn't pay much attention; he's got a specific reason why he came to see you; he's wary. Or if you're just processing him under duress - you know, sort of pinned him in a subway or something - he's got a specific reason for not talking to you. And with all this we have fast processing.

And if I could I would pull this trick. It's a dangerous trick; it'll lose you preclears just by the fact they won't come back. I ordinarily for some reason or other am doing this. I will process somebody or talk to somebody in two sessions. In the first session, just the first session, I'll just talk to them. I'll not ask them to do anything. And I won't talk to them for longer than about five or ten minutes. Just an interview to find out whether or not they're going to be processed according to them. And twenty-four hours later, bust their case wide open; make them come back at the same period the next day.

Well, this doubles up the amount of appointments you have or something like that. But you would discover, I am sure - I'm not advising you to do this; it's not a vital thing; it's just a matter of opinion - that you would lose, in doing so, in the preclear, that barrier which he erects the first time he ever meets anyone. And you would have, then, on your second session a preclear who had already tested the surroundings and found them not dangerous.

Whereas, if he were to put up his barrier and you started processing him, he's trying to do two things at once: get used to his environment and so forth. Also, he would have a reluctance to confide in you unless he'd known you for some time. Well, twenty-four hours is good enough. He now knows you, see. He hasn't just met you. This makes a slight difference.

Well, the fact that he isn't holding in is very good for an auditor. An auditor then finds it quite easy to simply drop his - drop into his space or drop some space around him, so to speak, just to include him in. You're not operating, then, against a barrier. And it's a pretty good practice and I would at least do it this way. I don't follow that down with kids. Kids are pretty overt. You talk to them and so forth, and it only takes a couple of moments to adjust a child to where he is, because he's not lost, whereas your preclear is lost.

I would do it on somebody who appeared to be to me a rather difficult case. I look at this person and I give him a couple of test questions and all of a sudden realize I'm looking at a very rough, rough case, according to his own lights, and just make him come back twenty-four hours later. And explain it to him on the order of "Well, your case is a very special one and I don't have quite enough time to give you what you deserve right here at the moment. And so you come back in twenty-four hours, because I'm very interested in your case because I've never seen quite anything like it." And you're all set. He'll come back - don't worry about that - if you tell him that. And all he's doing is giving you - he's holding up a mock-up for you to admire anyhow. And he's held it up to everybody and finally gotten in the habit of doing so. Now he knows he's in trouble, but he doesn't know why he's in trouble and he's forgotten why he's started to do this thing. It's all very simple. Now, you don't - you don't get him anyplace by simply telling him, "You're just doing this thing because you want somebody to admire your mock-ups." Yeah, that's really the only reason he's doing it. All right.

What then is the solution on a very difficult case as far as processing is concerned? If a case is difficult, the case isn't looking and the case is wary. The case is in present time on a hectic or arduous or apathy basis - they're just there - and it's a present time to which they're completely unaccustomed and they're sure - they went there with the postulates "Something is going to happen," you see; "Something dreadful or something - the Chinese are going to jump out of the walls with long knives, or something of the sort and hack me to pieces if I take my attention off of that wall. And you don't want this to happen and..."

You upset him when you say, "I'll come back tomorrow." You've introduced that lag and you upset him because you've upset his postulate. Well, that puts you with altitude. You made him wrong. Make him wrong that much, now you can make him wrong further, because he also has the postulate, "He can't do anything for me. There is no remedy." And you've made him right to that degree. He didn't get remedied that day. And he kind of has a tendency to lay it all aside.

If I had a lot of very rough cases to do over again - and I do mean a lot of very rough cases - very, very rough cases; maybe rougher than you'll ever run into. Because these guys were, to a large degree, being processed under duress. They didn't want any processing, and so forth. And running into this, every time - mind you now, this is without - without a single exception - every time I'd process somebody who was a rough case, I have wished like mad before I was halfway through the session that I had simply dropped in an interview on the basis, because the person was fending so hard that we never had any time for processing and no energy left for anything but defense.

Now, you see that? See what that is there? It's not a problem of you. It's a problem of the preclear. Of course, it gets you into the sloppy habit of thinking about it later. But you'll be surprised that this will happen: Your clarity on this person's case twenty-four hours later will be very great. Very great clarity. You'll know the next morning - you'll suddenly think about the case - you'll know exactly what's wrong with him.

Well, you really don't have to - you don't have to know that much to process these days. You don't have to have an intuition. We needn't enter any uncertainty or guesswork into it at all. But it does happen that that is the case. We know what we should have done. And if we didn't do it, then we can do it. An auditor who even vaguely is running "I know what I should have done," of course, now can do what he should have done because he didn't do it. Very simple. Well, so much for that.

The indoctrination of the British auditor is faster, shorter operation entirely. And it tells you something when you look at that little set of cases there: They're all on two sides of the easy process. Anybody can tell you in psychoanalysis that the processing of children is the most difficult thing anybody ever attempted. And they can tell you as well that the processing of very old people is the most difficult thing ever attempted. And these cases are all on the junior or the senior - senior side, on age.

Now, it might be a very good thing for you to just lay aside on a case that's going to take a long time. If you think it's going to take a long time as you confront the case, see him tomorrow.

Now, a lot of you, in the processing you've done in this last week or so, have picked up a computation on the cases you have processed after you've processed the person. You go walking down the street and you all of a sudden say, "I know what was wrong with him." Then you might not get a crack at this preclear again right off the base. So if you have something like that - "I know what's wrong with him" - why, just go and bust his case. Just put it up. Just arrange scheduling or swap preclears or something and finish it off. Because it's a piece of unfinished business with you and you might as well run the cycle.

It is really too bad - too bad that we don't have right here at this moment a tradition of each one of you with a certainty on what you can do, but that is what we are trying to arrive at. A man is never an auditor until he's taken a case so fouled up that even slashing the Gordian knot or Standard Operating Procedure 45 couldn't possibly have cleared the case, worked on the case for a little while and had the case straighten out. This is quite an experience and the oftener it happens, the more certain the auditor gets that he can create an effect.

If auditors could just create that effect, you see, they wouldn't ever need any processing, and their own cases just blow up in their faces. That's the truth of the matter. Because you say, "Wow, super!" create that effect and the rest of it starts following out.

All right. What did you find out now about SOP 8, Step II?

Male voice: Well, in running it I was content to just mock up one body out there in a chair and I could sit and look at it all day. It seemed pretty nice and interesting. However, I threw several of them away and...

Hm? Male voice: I threw several of them away. And running it on the preclear, the preclear seemed to have better luck putting a new one up there periodically. It got a little better each time. Detail, in other words, was better.

But you kept putting them up there?

Male voice: No, I didn't. The preclear did.

You didn't. You just put one up there and looked at it.

Male voice: Oh, I put several but I'd just as soon put one and sit there and look at it.

Who let him do this?

Female voice: I did.

Who?

Female voice: Me.

You did that? Yeah, well, on that step level that you're processing there, they're very content to do that. And if you double-terminal them, they will hold them endlessly. They'd be perfectly happy about holding a double terminal there if they get it up at all. They'll just go on and hold it. There - it's a dramatization of no motion.

So the way to break this thing down is another method of doing it. I can give you a variation on that.

You don't process the preclear sitting down. He's too happy about it. Anytime your preclear is too happy about a process, do something because it means it's not going anyplace. If he gets real happy about a process, line charging, that's something else. But if he's just content with this process, beat him to death.

Now, I'll show you how this works. Here you are. Come over here.

Male voice: Chair?

Nope. Nope. No! That's just what we don't want.

Male voice: That's what I was afraid of

LRH: Turn your back to the room - your back to the room. All right, now move one step to the right. That's right. Now move a step to the left. Move another step to the left. Move another step to the right. There we go. Now, as we are moving one step to the right and one step to the left, let's mock up the body in front of you doing just that and going through those motions until we get the full muscular coordination of this. All right, let's do that.

PC: Well, that's easy.

LRH: That's real easy. Okay, let's see how much of the muscular sensation we can get into that mock-up.

PC: Okay.

LRH: See how much of the muscular sensation you can get into it. Let's see if we can get the weight on the balls of the feet.

PC: Yeah, I've got that.

LRH: You got that?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Good.

PC: If you weren't the auditor of this I wouldn't like it.

LRH: You wouldn't, huh?

PC: Nah.

LRH: Okay, now put your arms out at shoulder height as a spread eagle. Okay, now get the body doing that.

PC: Yeah.

LRR: Now, move it from left to right.

PC: Okay.

LRH: Mock it up doing just that.

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: Got that?

PC: Yeah, that's easy!

LRH: Good, now let's twist at the hips as we take the step.

PC: Okay

LRH: That's right.

PC: Ah!

LRH: That's right.

PC: Dancing!

LRH: Huh? There we go. Okay, get that mocked up real well. Let's see if we can get the heat in the body as it does that now.

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: Get the heat in it real well?

PC: Yeah, pretty good. Not real good.

LRH: All right, let's get the darkness inside the skull and let's look at that.

PC: Oh, boy, that's easy.

LRH: That's real easy. Well, get it over there in the mock-up.

PC: Yeah, sure. It was bound to be dark.

LRH: That's right. Now, let's get some blobs of energy flying around the mock-up, as you stand this way.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Now let's shift them and make them blob the other way.

PC: Boy, they're sure going all around him. Let's see now. All right.

LRH: All right, let's just mock up the rest of the room as the body is doing that now - no other people necessarily - just mock up the rest of the room.

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: Got that?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Well, let's get the space depth in the room.

PC: Got it.

LRH: Good, let's get the body doing that now and the space depth. Let's see if we can get some color into the body in the room.

PC: Sure.

LRH: Real good, huh?

PC: Bound to get color in there.

LRH: Bound to, huh? Okay. And let's see now if you can find no body right where the body is. That mock-up - find it's no mock-up.

PC: Yeah. Did that.

LRH: Now find the mock-up there.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Now find no mock-up there.

PC: The arms of the mock-up are getting tired.

LRH: Well, get the tiredness into the mockup.

PC: Well, I am.

LRH: Okay. Real good, real good. Now put your hands down at your side. Now let's be about eight feet back of your head.

PC: Well, I'm not certain.

LRH: Okay, what do you get instead when I ask you to do that? PC: Well, I get a little motion.

LRH: Hm?

PC: A little motion.

LRH: A little motion. What's the motion?

PC: A kind of a swaying motion.

LRH: You do?

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Do you get any perception on anything there?

PC: No.

LRH: Feeling?

PC: Just that swaying motion.

LRH: Hm?

PC: Just the swaying motion.

LRH: I see. I see. You do get a swaying motion?

PC: That's right.

LRH: All right. Let's mock up that body in front of you very complete and exact right now, with all the weight on it.

PC: Yeah.

LRH: Got that?

PC: Yeah, I've got it out there about ten feet.

LRH: Okay. Now, let's run explosions between you and it. The lines - explode the lines between you... Put a couple of lines there and then blow them up.

PC: Mmm.

LRH: Easy to do?

PC: Yeah, as easy as any of the rest of it.

LRH: Well, put a couple more lines there and blow them up.

PC: Mm-hm.

LRH: Where are these lines exactly?

PC: Well, I put one from the middle of the forehead of this body to the back of the head of that other body, and one from about the middle of the chest to the middle of the back of the other body.

LRH: Uh-huh. Did they blow up easily?

PC. Yup.

LRH: Good, let's just keep putting the lines in there and blowing them up.

PC: Same place?

LRH: Mm-hm. Got that?

PC: Yeah, the explosion seems to tend to come - more of it - this way than the other way. I don't mind, but that's the way it is.

LRH: They come more toward you than...?

PC: The force of them. Yeah.

LRH: Uh-huh. Well, pull in some more and make them blow.

Now just move your body into the same position as that mock-up.

PC: Just for a little bit.

LRH: Hah! Okay, that's all.

Did you notice any difference of exteriorization or any snap out and in?

Male voice: There's a snap out and in.

Notice any change in it?

Male voice: Well, it was easier.

It was easier.

Male voice: Well, it never has been hard, but it always is frightening.

Did it - did it frighten you so much?

Male voice: It didn't at all that time.

There we go. See, I'm not trying to belabor you with anything, but the other technique would be this: You would mock up as you went that - did that - mock-up that body. This gets a little complex, but you could mock-up an admiring throng admiring those communication lines that connect you with the mock-up. And get this admiring throng looking up underneath between the mock-up and the body, you see? And get it admiring those communication lines and admiring your determination there, and admiring those lines; get that, admiring those lines. And as you go forward on that, you gradually get these lines more and more and more.

Actually, the pc is scared stiff of his body when he does that. Every once in a while a pc will come around and take one look at a body and he'll practically jump through his skull.

Male voice: I could tell you an experience like that.

Huh?

Male voice: I could tell you an experience like that.

What is it?

Male voice: One time down in Phoenix I mocked up my body and took my time with it - toenail by toenail and so forth - from the floor up. And I made it go sit down in the chair for two hours while I did other mock-ups. They were pretty good then - the mock-ups. All at once I got scared. And I didn't know what I was scared of, so I unmocked all my junk and started over again, but it didn't cure it.

Hm. Hm. Well, this is the same...

Male voice: Pretty good mock-ups then, too, by the way.

You had better mock-ups then than you do now?

Male voice: Mm-hm. Mm-hm.

Well, your mock-ups have deteriorated?

Male voice: Mmm!

Well, what made them deteriorate?

Male voice: I'll be darned if I know. I thought I must be afraid of the body. I couldn't think of anything else in there to be afraid of.

Hm-mm. You're not afraid of the MEST universe. As you - as you go forward through this, oh, you would just continue that.

Who got exteriorized more easily on this technique?

Male voice: l think I scooted up a few times.

Did you snap back in?

Male voice: Hmm, a little bit.

Mm-hm. Is that the first time you've been exteriorized easily?

Male voice: Mmm. It was easier than ever before, I believe.

Mm-hm. Who got easier exteriorization or better perception on this technique?

Male voice: I got better perception.

Better perception.

Male voice: Yes.

Mm-hm.

Male voice: I mocked up a very large mock-up of myself, way down in Delaware Bay, a mile or two high.

Mm-hm.

Male voice: And I got very good visio on it.

Mm-hm. That's afterwards.

Male voice: Hm?

That's afterwards.

Male voice: After what?

No, don't tell me you did Step II by mocking yourself up down in Delaware Bay. Of course, you got a communication...

Male voice: Uh-huh.

.. exchange on this, I shouldn't be objecting. But you should've just mocked yourself up in a chair.

Male voice: I was in a chair down in Delaware Bay.

Oh! You did the same scene?

Male voice: Yeah!

On that size proportion.

Male voice: Yeah.

Oh, I see. Same scene.

Male voice: Mm-hm.

Well, that's what you're supposed to do. That's what you're supposed to do. We have - the reason for the motion there, is the aliveness of the mockup - the aliveness of this. And as the guy slides out, he's having to keep the body in motion. And he'll get fascinated with this problem: the fact that he can still keep the body in motion although he's outside. It's for a little bit higher level of case than the one we just demonstrated it on.

Step II is having motion difficulty with the body already. He's gone from Step I to an incomplete belief that he will be able to control the body if he gets outside. He's just a little bit afraid of this.

Well, now, how much of this rocking from side to side would you take, and so forth? Wear him out. Wear him out if you were doing this technique. Do it for an hour.

You felt yourself come out? Why, tell me this - this is a peculiarity here - tell me this: Why weren't you exteriorizing at first as you did that?

Male voice: Well, I was paying too much attention to this body.

How were you paying attention to this body?

Male voice: Well, I was picking up what's in it to put in the other one.

You also want to keep in communication with a preclear. Did you just hear what this man said?

Male voice: Putting the motion and the emotion and the heat and weight and junk like that in the other one, you want to make the...

Now, did it remain in the body you were moving, afterwards, too?

Male voice: Not unless I kept my attention out there.

Ah!

Male voice: This morning I was - I had a somatic and I kept putting it out in that other body too. And it'd stay out there for a little while and then come back.

Mm-hm. Mm-hm. What is there we have to put in the other body?

Male voice: Sensation.

Do we have to put sensation in the other body?

Male voice: Well, we don't have to but it's something.

I was...

Male voice: ... to do.

Well, I know, but would that be bad?

Male voice: No. Heavens no.

Well, would it be bad to have no sensation?

Male voice: Well, I don't suppose it'd be any too good, but it'd be all right. It's just ...

To live forever with no sensation.

Male voice: Well, that wouldn't be any good, no.

That wouldn't be any good! Well, how interesting! Well, now what would you do knowing that?

Female voice: You mean we're going to start with him all over again?

Yeah, what would you do now, knowing that?

Female voice: Well, I thought we ought to take what you just did...

We found out it wasn't good enough just to shoot it down there; he had to look at this body and find out what it was doing in order to make the other body do it.

Female voice: Yeah.

What additional process would you use then? Come on, what would you do with this pc now that you know this? What do you know?

Female voice: Well, apparently the way to exteriorize on this thing - there's actually a point that he slips the real body into the position of the mock-up.

Yeah, but what - what was he doing there?

Female voice: Did not get more and more perceptics into the mock-up.

Ah. And what perceptic? Don't answer this sixty-four-dollar question.

Female voice: Could only be somatic or muscular distress.

What's holding him in that body? Let's get hot, huh? What's holding him in that body? Come on. What's nailing him there?

Female voice: It's interest, I think.

Nuh-uh! Come on! Come on, let's get hot. He's sitting right there and we'll - not pulling any punches around here. I don't have to say this is an evaluation for him; he doesn't even hear this, and if it's wrong, it's wrong.

Female voice: Mm-hm.

In case I'm not right. Well, what's holding him in that body?

Male voice: Think.

Don't look! If you're good enough at looking, you can tell.

Male voice: I figure I know.

What?

Male voice: Feeling.

Yeah? What kind of feeling?

Male voice: Pain.

Yeah? Pain? Okay, and what else?

Male voice: It looks for me.

Come on, what's holding him?

Female voice: Perception.

Yes, of course, but perception of what?

Female voice: The MEST universe.

Hm! Hm! Do you mind - do you mind if I use a three-letter word in mixed company?

Female voice: Use four if you like.

When they say sensation...

Female voice: Yes?

.. they mean one thing only. If you could get a preclear to mock up the completeness of sensation of the second dynamic.

Female voice: Oh, sure.

.. himself - this is why Freud got off on this mad race, see.

Female voice: Yeah.

He would all of a sudden realize he didn't need a body.

Female voice: That's right.

He could mock the sensation up. Well, every once in a while a pc will hang up on this one. They'll really hang up on that thing royally. It doesn't mean that there's a thing wrong with their second dynamic as a body or their sexual behavior or anything else. It's just a fact that they have hit this particular computation and then they hit it hard, see? So, it would be - it would be a rather delicate affair for a girl to process this preclear in this mid-Victorian society. But the fact of the case is that the sensation of which he speaks would be the missing sensation in the mock-up in the body. And if you leave bodies - oh-oh! Oh-oh! You might not hook up those lines again, see? And if you never hooked up the lines again, and so forth.

All right, now, we talk about pain. He's saying pain - he's going to hit downscale from an anxiety about any. Because all pain is, is condensed sex.

Female voice: Mm-hm.

And all sex is, is just condensed emotion.

Female voice: Mm-hm.

All emotion is, is condensed looking. And you've got it. So, let's just take a look at this as a combination.

Now, let me tell you something in passing about "Mr. Old Second Dynamic." The second dynamic starts with a postulate; this is why it is serious on a case, but it's really not any - it's not near as serious as eating. Boy, don't ever lose sight of that. Don't ever in your own thirst for sensation ever lose sight of the fact that sex is secondary to eating.

Let's take this imponderable case of the rat. It has been discovered by modern science - I often wondered where they kept "modern science" or who he was. But, he must be a nice chap. Anyway, everybody refers to him - Mr. Modern... That upset you?

Male voice: What? What you said?

What I was saying about the...

Male voice: No, carry on.

Okay.

Now, modern science has discovered, after vast observation, that mice when fed badly (they say fed on carbohydrates excessively and no protein), procreate wildly in spite of the fact that they obviously have a less of a food supply than formerly, making the big imponderable. Well, the imponderable is, is animals can't help but survive, so they're not going to try very hard to survive, so they've got to survive anyway, so you've got to work like mad to survive. It's just all messed up, you see? The computation is an identity computation. Okay.

Now, let's look at this problem of why mice - we'll just accept that modern science has discovered this; I found this is a very unreliable thing to do - will procreate with poor food or no food. Well, that's not a riddle; we up and answered that. It has ceased to be - needn't puzzle Mr. Modern Science anymore. Because it's simply this: Sex is the answer to "Can't survive as an organism." And "Can't survive as an organism" depends upon two things: pain and food. Too much pain - no survival; too little food - no survival.

Sex comes in when the rations run out. Remember that, because you'll peg that on a track just boom! And you'll always want to find on a pc with whom you're having any difficulty at all exteriorizing, you'll find they all suffer from the same thing, which is lack of interest, and this in essence is some or other level of apathy - high or low apathy. You see there apathy at various levels, but it's still apathy and that's still a no interest, which means no anchor points - "pain," “interest" and "anchor points" are simultaneous in meaning. All right.

What - what happens? You - if a man is interested in sensation, he is already trying to be an effect, but this is only because he found he's been an effect. So if he's been too serious an effect - too seriously an effect - then after that, he decides that he can't survive. Simultaneously with "can't survive" is "must procreate."

So, the age of puberty is the age where the young boy, the young girl takes a nose dive. And you'll find them hung up on the track there more often than not. Because that is so complete a computation and is so chronic, it's so inherent in structure, that all he has to do is have sexual sensation turn on and he recognizes that he "can't survive”.

His first taste of death is his first taste of future procreation. See? I mean that's - it's the substitute. Sex comes in when the rations run out. And when the body gets excessively tired sometimes, it'll become sexually stimulated. If it becomes ill one way or the other, it could become sexually stimulated.

It's quite interesting how many things could happen that could create sexual stimulation. And they all sum up to this one thing: "Can't survive." Now, it even goes further than that: They run off the "Can't survive." Now if they've gone into a libido cessation, they can't survive twice. They can't survive twice, so they go into the third. They go into dynamic seven. See? Dynamic seven shows up.

You can't survive as yourself and then you can t survive as a progeny and then they feel they can't survive as a spirit either And the magnitude of gain a case can make is something that you would find it hard to appreciate until you'd run part of the race yourself. The magnitude of gain is fantastic; it's enormous! And we'd have to almost recover on the whole track principle, those "can'ts." "Can't survive" is "Can't survive as a body." "Can't survive" - "Can't survive as progeny in the future;” and then the last "Can't survive" is "Can't survive as sex." So when a fellow's libido runs out he turns to religion! See that?

And that's why when you mark down a mystic, when you mark down a person who is deep in religion, you can immediately reach back to the love affair that failed. Just like that! It's just automatic response - pam!

Fellow says, "Well, I've always - I've always had a great respect for Christ."

And you say, "Well, when did you lose her?"

Fellow says, "What do you mean? What are you talking about?"

That's the way it goes, see? He all of a sudden says, "Well, her name was Gertrude." Only he probably doesn't; he's probably at that moment in a frozen silence. You won't see any emotion out of him. If you want to see some immediate emotion, get him to reaching and withdrawing from Gertrude, and Gertrude reaching and withdrawing from him. And you'll see a little change on the case immediately.

Many a man has been processed by artificial techniques, which is to say subjective techniques, just endlessly, without showing a great deal of change. He's lost a few somatics and he's gone this way or that, until somebody all of a sudden one day says, "Reach for Gertrude." He doesn't have to spill grief on Gertrude. What we've got to do is rehabilitate his looking, at which time we'll rehabilitate his feeling. You could actually stretch out his distance to look by rehabilitating Gertrude. Where? Let's put her way out on the horizon. And let's keep putting her way out on the horizon. Interesting technique. It'll spill a little pain, a little grief all sorts of things.

If you actually run into somebody who can only now survive as a spirit - because this will foul him up like mad because he's gone into artificial spiritualism. He isn't himself. The thetan is not only gone now, the thetan is gone as a body, gone as progeny and now gone as a spirit, so he has to waste admiration on other spirits. And you start him wasting Christ, and you start him wasting space or God, and he's going to get some interesting results, more or less.

When somebody suddenly comes up and tells you that, well, the possibility there - we want to find out where he is. This is the gradient scale as you go down for a body: "Can survive as self - can't survive as self" "Can survive as sex (future children) - can't survive as sex (future children)." Now, there are a lot of little intersteps there he could make, but the next one you re really interested in is the brass ring - seven. Because this is what's keeping him in his body.

Lots of ways to do this: "Where's Gertrude?" We'll get into those techniques that spring this fairly rapidly. But this is what's happened to the case.

Now, what are these "Can't survives"? There's three "Can't survives." Brother, when he can't even survive as a spirit, when he can't even be spiritual and still stay in a body and still make a go of it and so forth, he turns to God with a passion and an upset and so forth that is found only in insane asylums. Because that really is the last waste, because his God is space and that's all there is to it. He's trying to waste space. Interesting technique, by the way - wasting space, wasting gods. Okay, but that's a subjective technique.

What's wrong with such a case? There are dozens of ways you could do this. But there's a well of apathy on every case that is difficult. And I've often wondered if it's possible to solve such a case, spilling some of the apathy. I've tried now and then. I've been trying with cases just working with them. There's a holdup on the case line that - it just has to do with spilling a little apathy.

Apathy is lower than grief and it's more of a blockade than grief. It's very easy to run apathy. I'll show you how to run apathy.

Run "Can't survive" out here four times; put it in four places - just "Can't survive."