I am probably covering many thousands of years of developed thought here. People have been thinking about how man thought for a very long time. What is man’s relationship to the physical universe? What is his relationship to himself and his relationship to the group? These have been primary thoughts with man for thousands of years.

If what I have been covering seems a little bit rapid you will have to forgive me, because to cover it in full would probably require touching each step of the development, tracing each point back and showing the evaluation of each point in it, and this would probably take a minimum of two or three hundred hours of lectures.

The point out of this which is vital to you is the affinity, communication and reality triangle, as a triangle, and the tone scale of emotion and its relationship to the tone scale of reality and the tone scale of communication, or perception. There is a definite interrelation in these things.

If you have a person who has to be dragged up to apathy, you had better drag him up to apathy before you expect to get any grief! If you have a person who has very bad sonic shut-off, bad visio shut-off and so on, you can drag him up the scale on the emotional scale and accomplish the perceptic turn-on, because he goes up the scale on a whole strata. The whole thing rises simultaneously. Every point of this triangle is dependent on the other two, and every two is dependent upon one. We can’t cut down one without cutting down the other two, and we can’t rehabilitate one without rehabilitating the other two. On the positive side, we can rehabilitate any point on that triangle by rehabilitating any other point on the triangle.

If you have a preclear with a sonic shut-off, it is not very advantageous for you to try to get every commands off the case that would shut off sonic. As a matter of fact, you won’t turn on sonic that way. But you can turn it on by bringing the preclear up the tone scale on the affinity line, the emotional line. You cannot expect anybody who is chronically in grief to have much in the way of sonic.

Now, the interrelationship is close but it is not exact. These points don’t raise evenly, all at once, but it is so close that you could address the problem of shut-off sonic by rehabilitating the computational ability of the preclear. The way to do that is to pick up all that you can about him being told that he is dumb, he is stupid, he can’t think, and so forth, and you will find that it will bring up his communication level.

It appears to be very different to turn on sonic by making a person compute better about where he is and what he is doing, but that is what increases his reality. Or you can bring it up just on the basis of knocking out all the engrams that say everything is unreal. That, all by itself, will turn on sonic.

If you knock out all those things, you will find out that the person will have a better chance of perceiving his engrams. It is obvious that if a person believes everything is unreal and if he can’t think about things straight, he will not be able to listen to something that he doesn’t think is there. And if he can’t think straight and if he can’t work in the field of reality, you certainly would not expect him to be in very great affinity with existence. His emotional tone could not be expected to be at its optimum.

When you cut affinity on a person, sharply, you also cut communication and reality. And it is a strange thing that when one has cut communication thoroughly with another, and when one has a low tone scale value for that person, that person to some degree ceases to exist for the individual. One of the favorite things which you will hear people say is “As far as I’m concerned, he doesn’t exist anymore. I hate him; he doesn’t exist!” — or that they are going to wipe the other person out of existence, which is a little bit further up the scale. These things are interlocked.

You sometimes find an individual who has good sonic but a rather poor sense of reality. He hears it, but he doesn’t believe it. This may seem rather strange. What you have got there is the fact that sonic-cuts in rather early; you can have sonic and a poor sense of reality. In the reactive mind, sonic cuts in fairly low, and that should tell you immediately that most people are in a bad state!

Now, it so happens that we say “Get the grief off the case. Get off these painful emotion engrams,” and so on, but you are not going to be able to do much for a person on whom the summation of his reactive mind values is 0.4 (grief is 0.7 or thereabouts). You have got to raise this person’s tone so that he can cry, so that you can get grief off! This is particularly true of a psychotic who is in an apathetic state.

I want you to keep in mind how many of these stacks of triangles there are. There are lots of them. There is the reactive mind tone scale, and there is, in the same individual, his natural tone scale. What is evident is the natural tone scale modified by the reactive mind tone scale, but when you enter into processing you are mainly addressing the reactive mind tone scale. The complete sum of the individual would be the reactive tone scale plus the whole tone scale, averaged. In processing you are dealing with the reactive mind, and you head him right straight toward it.

An individual who normally may be just relatively bored with life has an average tone scale that is pretty high. Maybe it’s up there around 2.5 — well above normal — and his general conduct, his whole being in the society, is what we see. The person’s native, genetically endowed tone scale is up around 4, and his reactive tone scale is down around 1 or 0.5. Take 0.5 and add it to 4.0, and you get 4.5, way up. Average it out and you have him way down. The average individual is around 2.5, and 0.5 would be his reactive mind tone scale. Or perhaps his endowed tone scale would be up around 3.5. Add the two together and you get 4; divide it by two and you get his tone scale at 2, which is overt resentment.

We must not forget that we are dealing with two tone scales with every individual; and the aberree walking around in the society is the average of these two scales, modified by the fact that the reactive scale is quite changeable and varies from day to day as it exists for the moment. There is an acute (momentary) scale and there is the overall sum of the aberrations in the mind, which would make up the average reactive mind tone scale.

But now, on an immediate level, we get this fellow’s reactive mind tone which would vary maybe from 0.2 up to 1.5. He will get angry, then he will go off again on to these lower values, and up and down from moment to moment, depending on which engram is in restimulation. You would therefore be able to vary a person’s overall tone quite wildly by merely taking him down the track and parking him in one of these engrams for a moment, then bringing him up to present time. You can make a person look like a roller coaster with this sort of thing. You can do this physiologically because it is also applicable to the physiology of the beings

His survival potential goes up and down this tone scale. If this fellow is in very good health and he is in very good shape, he is going to survive very easily. If he is in very bad health and poor shape, he isn’t going to survive so well. This is his potential in terms of physical survival.

You can alarm a medical doctor who doesn’t know Dianetics by bumping a preclear’s temperature up, giving him a fast pulse rate, or changing his health and apparent physiological age. Sometimes you go back down the track with somebody and knock out a bad holder or a valence shifter, then bring the person back up to present time and he will seem to be about ten years younger. It is quite variable.

So when you are dealing with Dianetics, you are really demonstrating things that look like straight black magic to somebody who doesn’t know what you are doing, because of course you are changing this person physiologically, and you are changing the tone scale of his reactive mind.

The reactive mind tone scale is always below 2.0. It doesn’t contain emotions above that except manics, and these hardly count because the emotional text of them is implanted artificially. A person has an emotion “I’m so happy, I’m so happy, I’m so strong!” The apparent emotional scale on it is rather high and it could be added in that way, but the overall sum as far as the mind is concerned is very low because this “I’m so happy, I’m so happy” is inevitably in the vicinity of “My God, I’m so depressed.” That is the manic-depressive.

You can get a person down the track and actually restimulate one of these manic engrams and you apparently get somebody who is wildly happy. He may stay that way for a couple more days and tell you, “Oh, I’m clear now, I know it! I’m absolutely clear!” then in a couple more days the thing wears out and he is very depressed. That is the manic at work; it’s just part of the reactive mind bank. But the overall average of a reactive mind bank does not go above 2.0, ever. A person whose reactive mind is in very, very good shape might have one around 1.2 on the tone scale, but that reactive mind would be practically empty!

Let’s start calling this tone scale a perceptic scale and we will get the same sort of answers. We can say a persons perceptics vary, and they do. As you restimulate engrams this way and that, they vary.

Now let’s call it a reality scale, and we see that his sense of reality will vary. It is just as acute as putting him through the tone scale.

You are dealing with three quantities here which are interlocked, and you can raise any two of them by treating the third. So this is very valuable to you as an auditor.

You have possibly worked somebody who couldn’t get off a grief charge although you couldn’t find anything else wrong with the case particularly. He just lay there and said with a sigh, “Oh, well....” You were running into a reactive bank which was below grief for that case.

Another person could have an engram that artificially fixes him on this tone scale into anger, so he will dramatize anger on it. You had better knock that engram out. Because he is fixed on the tone scale, he is not going to get down to grief.

A person can be stuck on the track, then, in anger; and as you look up and down a person’s time track, you will find that the emotions are parked somewhere on that track. There is an incident in which they are held, where the emotions are full on. There is where the emotional scale is locked up.

Now, this is just as valid and is the same kind of computation as somebody being stuck someplace on the track with a certain age flash. His age is locked up at that point.

Supposing this person has a chronic pain in his leg: he is locked up on the track at a point where there is a pain in his leg. One shouldn’t think of a chronic somatic as something that is just accidental to be gotten rid of; this thing is a good locator. It tells you immediately that pain is locked up on the track at a certain point, and that is the only place where this person can feel and express pain.

This can get so bad that you can run a case into an engram, particularly one where a groupers has been triggered, and thereafter when the person has a headache, for example, his foot will hurt. When he has just received a big injury in the arm, the foot will hurt. When his mother has morning sickness, his foot will hurt. He has just one pain that he expresses for every pain that comes in. All of his pain is locked up in an incident where his foot was hurt.

Or we could take an emotion. Here is this person who is going around chronically dramatizing anger. He varies between red-hot mad and covertly mad, according to the intensity of restimulation of the emotional engram in which he is stuck. Ask this person to feel pleasure, he gets mad! Ask him to feel loving, he gets mad! Ask him to feel apathetic, he gets mad! He has a fixed value on the tone scale.

Now, just because this person with one somatic is dramatic and more interesting, don’t overlook the fact that a person’s emotions can be tied up on the track in the same way, so that any emotion which is in the bank will be retranslated into the one he is locked up in and that emotion will keep dramatizing itself. You’ll see apathy turned out that way.

This should demonstrate something to you about the endocrine balance.

The new engram that gets restimulated has a little tab that comes up on it which says “The emotional tone of this engram is 0.6.” But all that the person who is stuck on the track in an emotion of anger will register and express is the emotion which is right there — anger.

Or we have one where the emotion coming through on an engram is rage. Papa and Mama are having a quarrel in the prenatal area. You are running your preclear, trying to get him to express some of this emotion in order to run it out of the engram, and the fellow lies there apathetically during the whole thing. You run something else and he runs that apathetically. Then he runs a pleasure moment and he runs it apathetically. Don’t get the idea that this person is merely apathetic; he is stuck in an engram which has apathy as its emotional tone.

The most common emotion for a person to turn on solidly, for some reason or other, is terror. But, of course, someone in this society can’t go around expressing terror, so the whole thing simply gets sealed up. His necessity level on the expression of emotion just closes over the whole thing. This entire case will present the most occluded aspect on emotion that you ever want to see. The person can go through a grief incident, an apathy incident, a boredom incident, and there is nothing there at all. It is covered up terror. And then one day, all of a sudden, if you really know your business and you know about the emotional scale, you will get him into an engram and he will go “Yah! Yow! Wow! Wow!” and practically explode all over the room in terror. If you let him escape out of that engram now, you will just double-seal it. Ride it through and get that emotion out and the first thing you know, you will be able to take him up to a pleasure moment and he’ll feel pleasure.

One case was stuck in about four places on the track, each one of them a terror moment. I had quite a time with him. I worked with the case for quite a while before I finally got this person near what he was near. His visio turned on and inevitably it was a coffin, and he was in stark terror, with a servant girl telling him all about being buried in the cold ground with the worms. This child, who was already shut down by grief, went into terror. There were also holders right there in the terror. And there he had been for years and years, as far as his emotions were concerned, standing alongside of his grandfather’s coffin.

Similarly, the shut-off of computation will occur in an engram someplace, and if he is stuck in terror or in something that turns off perceptics, don’t expect this person to be able to think very well. The engram doesn’t have to say “You’re dumb.” Just by being restimulated with the person held on the track in it, it will turn off his perceptics and his affinity, and he isn’t going to think well. Did you ever see anybody quite as rattle-brained as a person who was experiencing terror?

These things should not be confused with the overall basic mechanics of the mind. You can take an engram with not a word in it, pack it full of enough pain and emotion, and you can have a person’s computational ability, his sense of reality, his affinity and his communication shut off. It has got so much impact that when it gets restimulated he is automatically at that place on the track. That is what is meant by a mechanical shut-off.

The rest of them are statement shut-offs, computational, like command somatics: Mama says, “I have such a pain in the back of my head, I have such a headache.” So if he is in Mama’s valence in that incident, he gets a pain in the back of his head.

The real meat of engrams is on the mechanical level. Language happens to be just one perceptic in the engram. So don’t overlook the mechanical aspects of an engram, because they are very important. And there is an interlocking on this triangle of these three factors. This is the way you handle mechanical computation.

Now, let’s take a look at the time track. There are twenty-six perceptics on one time track, including sight, sound, hot and cold, pain and emotion — all the senses, straight across the line — and each one has its own track. In other words, as a person comes up and down the time track he has all these things available.

This time track gets out of phase. Various parts of it get occluded. So you get someone running through an engram getting pain and a faint impression of sound. Actually, he should be running through the incident on all perceptics, but he is only hitting those. How thoroughly do you think that engram is erased? It has got twenty-four senses left in it!

Somebody who tells me “You know, it’s a funny thing about engrams, but after you erase them, they reappear” must have been running the preclear out of valence. Furthermore, he couldn’t possibly have been running the right incident to resolve the case, and probably shouldn’t have been running any pain engrams at all. He should have been running some emotional engrams, trying to tune up this case, shooting out some circuitry, and knocking out some valence commands. In other words, he should have been doing anything but running a basic area engram on somebody, out of valence, and running two perceptics out of twenty-six. That should give you some sort of an idea of the mechanical importance of senses.

Computationally, you run all these things out of the engram. That is to say, each one of these things can be shut off by a statement; but they can also be shut off mechanically, and that is the basic shut-off. The language is incidental to it.

You cannot pull the text out of an engram independently of all the rest of this material. It is useless! If a person is doing that, you have some problems in circuitry and emotion that you should solve before you get down to running engrams.

Don’t label a pianola case as anybody who will run text. A pianola case, a case which is running easily, is a case which is running in valence and running out twenty-six perceptics for every engram. They don’t have to be sorted out one by one. This person is in valence and he is running out all the perceptics as they occur in the engram. In other words, he is getting the pain in the proper places, the feeling of moisture, the feeling of hot and cold, and all the other perceptics as he goes through this engram. That’s a pianola case!

You send him to the engram necessary to resolve the case, he goes right there and runs it off with all the perceptics, and the thing reduces or erases. You send him someplace else and that reduces or erases. That is a pianola case. A pianola case is not just somebody who runs text.

The way you make a pianola case is by first addressing the case computationally, to get into some of it to find out what it is and what the overall computation of this case is. Then you try to knock it out mechanically. Get some of the emotion off the case. Try to get this person up to some apathy, maybe, and knock out some of these emotional charges that are on the line; try to find out why you can’t get there. You will generally find out that it is circuitry and valence problems. Then you will have to shoot some circuits out of the case.

At long last, after you have fixed the case up so it is in beautiful shape, you then run yourself some full-parade engrams — from the bottom to the top — and you will have made a pianola case.

People are sometimes over anxious to get into a case and run engrams: “We’ve got to run some engrams! Well, let’s put him into a painful emotion incident. He doesn’t get any painful emotion off. Well, let’s go down in the basic area and run some engrams. He’s getting text in the basic area? Well, that’s fine; we’ll run out the text.” But you could run that text in the basic area, probably, for two thousand hours and find all sorts of engrams. As a matter of fact, the person’s tone would come up a little bit and he would get a little bit better because you would have taken some of the charge off some of these valences, but he will never reach clear that way!

All you have to do is fix up the case so it is pianola, using these three factors. You want to pick up his ability to communicate with his own past, with the present and with the future. You want to pick up his feeling of affinity for his fellow man and for himself, and you want to raise his sense of reality about his own past, about his present and about other people. Raise these things up, because he is not going to be able to run anything worth a nickel until you get his tone scale up the line.

You are lifting your preclear by his own bootstraps and it is tough, because as you try to bring him up the line, what is depressing him is some of these engrams. And there is where the smartest side of auditing is: shooting circuits, knocking out the emotional blocks, getting him moving adequately on the track and getting him into his own valence. Unfortunately, this is the first thing you tackle and it is the toughest end of the case, when the case is the most aberrated.

The case is never going to be as bad as it is the first moment you address it.

Maybe eighty hours from then, you are still shooting circuitry. Maybe two hundred hours from then, you are still trying to adjust this case into being a pianola case. But if at any time down along the line you get the sudden idea that “Oh, well, we’ll just run some engrams in the basic area. I’m tired of worrying about the rest of this thing. I’ve tried running out some of these emotional locks and where he is held on the track, and tried to resolve these computations. Let’s just run some engrams, because he’s out of valence anyway and it doesn’t matter,” you can then go on, I imagine, for a couple of thousand hours and you won’t get anyplace.

So this is the place where you spend the time, getting the case into shape to run, raising the person’s ability to communicate with himself — his sonic — and picking up his general affinity. You have to knock out the preponderance of apathy in this case in order for him to come up into grief. You have to knock out the preponderance of grief in this case for him to come up along the line, and you have to knock out some of the fear and terror in this case just to get him up the reactive scale far enough so that he can get sonic on, and that is what we are trying to do.

It is actually better to go into a case at the beginning and just find little incidents where the person was maybe frightened a bit. They are probably locks on a real fear charge someplace in the case, but they are locks, and as locks they are holding attention units. When you knock them out, one by one, you are going to free attention units and raise this person’s tone a little bit. And when you do that, he is going to get better sonic or maybe some impressions.

The only thing wrong with the whole reactive mind is the fact that it has absorbed attention units. But you, as an auditor, can get some of them back and you can turn on some of these emotions. You have to put the case together with your bare hands sometimes. People can be in very bad shape.

A person can be very thoroughly stuck on the track and you may not be able to find where he is stuck or be able to budge him. Yet you can still get enough attention units to run something on an emotional line, to get some charge off his circuits or perhaps get him more into valence. In other words, you can do things for this case even if the case is stuck on the track.

But don’t start in on a repeater techniques basis, have the person repeat a lot of phrases, and then say, “Well, the case isn’t doing very well.” That is not auditing!

The auditor who is clever takes a good look at this case and tries to find out what he has to do to make it run, and the mechanics of the case are lying there right before his eyes.

The one thing that you will learn above all others in the professional certification school is that the tools with which you are working are not hit-or-miss, now-and-then tools. You will become a better auditor if you just recognize one thing: You are working with precision tools which work. Use them with conviction and assurance, and your cases are going to resolve very readily. If you learn that well, you have learned the major thing that you can be taught, and you can get the rest out of books.

It means that when you tell the somatic strips to go anyplace, you know that it went. You know the file clerk will cooperate with you if you can reach him at all. You know that the engrams exist. You know how early you have to go. You know his emotions are tied up on the track someplace. You know his computational ability is tied up somewhere. You know what you are working with. You know about these circuits and you go after them with assurance.

For instance, you look over the case and find out this fellow is in a very apathetic state most of the time. So you see if you can actually run an apathy engram out of him. Painful emotion isn’t expressed simply by the word grief: A grief engram doesn’t cover the field of painful emotion, because there are terror engrams, apathy engrams, and other such painful emotion engrams. So you try to knock out some of this painful emotion and get his emotions freed on the track.

But this person can’t even move on the track. All right, use some Straightwire and knock out some locks. Have him remember the time when he was five years of age and somebody pushed a fist down his throat.

He says, “I can’t ever remember things like that. I can’t remember early; nobody can remember early.”

And you say, “Well, let’s see if you can remember your father and mother.”

“I can’t remember anybody. I don’t remember names; I don’t remember people.”

Where do you start in with a case like that? Well, as an auditor, you know your tools. You know the mechanics of what this person’s mind looks like mechanically and computationally. You know that you are dealing with the tone scale on a reactive mind basis. You know that this person has emotion and is able to attain a certain level at his optimum. You know something is suppressing that and you know the various tools you can use to get to it.

What do you do with someone who is like that? You say, “Well, take a look at me. Now, who am I?”

“Why,” he says, “you’re Mr. Smith.”

You say, “There, you’ve remembered one person. What do you mean, you can’t remember people? Who do you work for?”

“I work for a fellow by the name of Jones.” “Ha, there is another one you can remember.”

Start opening up the channels to the past, in other words, in any way that you possibly can, and start freeing attention units. Start putting him into communication with his own past and the reality of it will pick up.

So there is a variety of ways to use this same triangle; you keep going around on it. He communicates with his own past which then has greater reality, immediately. If you do that with straight memory, you have also freed some attention units and he has got more force of mind to tackle the problem.

You could go on with a person hour in and hour out, day in and day out, on straight memory and you would probably get him up to a point where he was pianola. I have seen it happen that a person’s tone was raised to such an extent and he had so many attention units finally freed by straight memory that if you suddenly asked him to go back down the track and pick up an engram, he would.

There is the difference, then, between a certified auditor and a book auditor. The book auditor doesn’t know, he hasn’t quite tried, he guesses these tools may work or they may not. So he sits there in a rather doubtful frame of mind, and after he has had lots of practice, he finally comes down to the basis of “Well, possibly there is something to this,” or “Gee whiz, there certainly is!” But he never gets into the complete knowledge of the fact that he is using a certain set of tools, or has the assurance he needs in order to use those tools adequately.

A certified auditor takes a look at the case and says, “Well, let’s see what’s wrong with this case. This person is in a very apathetic state of mind. Let’s find out about his parents. They quarreled a great deal. Let’s see who was guilty for giving him the bulk of his engrams. Let’s see how good his memory is. Let’s see how good his perceptics are. Let’s turn this thing on, and if we can’t get anyplace, let’s knock the circuitry out.”

In other words, he goes right straight along the line with Standard Procedure and never questions himself or the preclear once. He knows this person works just like every other preclear on the basic level at which he is operating. So he works with assurance, he knows his tools and he can knock the case apart with Standard Procedure.

Now, you will see from what we have covered that there is a triangle — affinity, communication and reality — which is interlocked. Whatever else you are doing in a case, you are always dealing with this triangle; and where your preclear errs on any point in that triangle, you can increase his potential on that point in which you are interested by improving him on the other two points.

Before we understood this triangle, if a person’s perceptics were shut off, one could only address his perceptics. In other words, if a person’s communication was bad, one tried to do something about it along that level, which took time. Now we can take a person whose communications are bad and we have got three points of entrance. We can address communication itself; we can increase this person’s sense of reality; or we can address affinity for other people by finding affinity breaks, rejections, and so forth, back in his past, or by finding emotional engrams or even light emotional locks. What we are trying to do is turn on his perceptics.

Nothing increases a person’s sense of reality as much as being thrown into a high-tension emotional engram! It is not just the fact that it comes off; it is such a convincer, computationally. Before this, he knew that nobody could ever tear him to pieces this way. You get him into the incident, and he comes up off the couch, his shoes fly across the room and he says, “There must be something to Dianetics; therefore there must be something to my own past — there must be something to me!”

His sense of reality has toughened up, right there. That is one of the values of an occasional “exploder” in a case. You are building up his sense of reality, so of course his sense of communication comes up, and certainly his sense of affinity comes up.

We are working upon a triangle. Any time we get one point of it that we have to resolve before we can go on with this case, we can address three points to solve that one. That is valuable, and knowing what you know now, after a study of this triangle, you should be able to derive new ways to use it. This is not material to be learned by rote, but derivational material with which you can think. An auditor who can’t and won’t think about his preclear’s case is not much of an auditor. This is material with which you can compute cases. The more you use this and the more you look at people around you, the more use you will find for it.

Let’s take two groups in the world, Russia and the United States, and ask “Why are Russia and the United States so mad at each other?”

Well, one corner of the triangle is out — communication. We talk about their iron curtain, they talk about capitalistic imperialism — there is no communication, so of course there is going to be no affinity. And as far as the reality of their aims is concerned, we regard them very poorly, and we can’t compute about Russia. The whole sordid fact of the case is that nobody is thinking on the subject or computing about Russia. Because communication is off and affinity is off, how can one think about it? There is no reality to the problem, so one won’t address it as a problem. That is a use on a group level for affinity, communication and reality.

Or you can say, “I wonder what’s wrong between my wife and myself the last couple of weeks? We haven’t been getting along too well.” Then you suddenly realize that when you come home at night you don’t bother to say much. Just do this: Simply walk in and say, “Good evening, dear. How are you? What did you do today? I had a pretty good time today. How is everything?” The affinity will go up, and you won’t have any trouble with your wife. Don’t bother to talk about the fights.

Any time you put anybody into communication with you, you can’t help but raise an affinity level, and you become more real to them, their problems become more real to you, they also become more reasonable, and you go into a further and deeper agreement with each other. That is how you can get with your worst enemy, actually, and effect a compromise. You can reverse this thing in the world of living as well as in the world of engrams, and you can do a lot with it.

Right here you have the hub of all interpersonal relations. If you want to know what Dianetics can do for you with regard to your personal relations with the rest of the people around you and the rest of society, there it is.

This is derivational material. You can think with it. If you see a situation declining between you and somebody else, you can do something about it.

In other words, over on this reality side, reality is in essence, in the field of thought, agreement. If you just agree with somebody who is busy fighting with you, the tone scale starts up. Sometimes it will come up so fast that affinity will shoot up and you are in perfect communication with that person; there is no more fight. It is as easy as shooting sitting ducks when you know how.

Or if he is mad at you all the time, you can say, “But look, these are the reasons why I have to do this thing. Is this reasonable or isn’t it?”

The person looks it over and says, “Well, you’re right. That’s about the only thing you can do, isn’t it? Well, let’s go out and have a drink.”

Those are the basic tenets on which processing is erected.