

LONDON GROUP COURSE TAPES (1953) 6/8


THE MISSING PARTICLE (CONTINUED)

A lecture given on 10 January 1953

Alternate title: GRADIENT SCALE, ADMIRATION PARTICLE

LGC-4B

A lecture given on 10 January 1953

[Based on R&D transcripts. This was checked against an
old reel for LGC-4. The reel starts in the middle of
LGC-4A and continues on into this lecture.]


Now, in the general course of events - continuing this
fourth lecture - you will find that the address of
admiration to any subject will result in clearing that 
subject. It'll knock out the held-down fives.

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

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

"Yeah." 

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

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

"Now admire that." 

"Mm. Hm. Yeah." 

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

"Yeah." 

"Now admire that." 

"Oh, yes."


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

"Just admire it some more."

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Male voice: Yes. 

Female voice: Definitely, yes.

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

[End of lecture.]
