OPENING PROCEDURE BY DUPLICATION 



A lecture given on 

6 June 1954 



This will take any case that has hung up and is having difficulty and will move him up through 

successive tone levels swiftly. One should not suppose that a case will not move on the scale. 

Auditors have been known to have had the goal, in an auditing session, of a good, quiet, orderly 

preclear. I never have had that goal particularly, but on the other hand I have scrupulously 

avoided techniques which merely produced an effect and did not produce a result. 



Well, here we have a technique which produces an effect and produces a result, because when 

you get through with this, somebody’s communication level has been raised. When you’ve 

done Opening Procedure by Duplication for any length of time above a half an hour you will 

see a change of tone in the case. Now this can be the change of tone of the G.E. (Genetic Entity: 

A composite of all the cellular experience recorded along the genetic line of the organism to the 

present body. It has the manifestation of a single identity. It is not the theta being or “I”.) The 



G.E. can change tone, the thetan can change tone. But where we have a G.E. changing tone we 

can then be prepared to have a little bit of a skid in tone when we’ve been doing Opening 

Procedure by Duplication. Let’s say we did it for one hour with considerable pyrotechnics. We 

laid off at that time and did not do it further. We did something else. The fellow seemed to be in 

fairly good shape. We can expect a few days later to have some semblance of all of this in view 

again, because the G.E. is in revolt, at which time we would simply do it again. This does not 

mean that a preclear slumps because he’s run on this. He never returns to the same state he was 

in, but the condition deteriorates slightly which you attained if you did nothing else in the 

session but Opening Procedure by Duplication. So we shouldn’t consider Opening Procedure 

by Duplication a finished and final thing with a case until we’ve done it several times. 

It goes this way. We get into communication with the preclear. Naturally if your preclear is 

extremely low scale, getting into communication will require mimicry and other such activities 

on your part - anything that would be communication. We get into a two-way communication 

with this preclear, and we talk to him enough to keep up the communication and to get some 

idea of some sort of a present time problem - we see whether he has any. That is mostly in the 

interest of: you’re interested in him and you are in communication now about something which 

is real to him. 



Having proceeded that far, we would then tackle this problem bluntly and head-on. We would 

tackle any possibility that this individual was unable to duplicate a command many times. And 

we would go into Opening Procedure and we would do Opening Procedure just as such very 

lightly for a very short time. We would have him go over and put his hand on the desk, and 

locate something that’s real in the room and go over and take hold of it, and withdraw from it, 

and we’d march him around the room for a very short time. I do mean a short space of time, 

because what we’re getting down to is the reason he won’t be able to perform Opening 

Procedure very easily. 



We’re going to find two locations in the room, and we’ll have an object in that location. We will 

have a book on the table, and on another side table or windowsill or something of the sort we 

will have another object, preferably a dissimilar object. We might have a hat, or an ashtray - any 

kind of object. One object on the table, one object in some other location in the room 

dissimilar. Don’t use two books, for instance. 



Now we ask the preclear to go to the first object, and we ask him to pick it up, and we ask him to 

describe it. We ask him its color, its temperature, its weight. Then we have him put it down. Of 

course a repetition of “put it down” looks possibly not good, being a sort of repeater technique 

in itself (Repeater Technique: This refers to the Dianetic technique using repetition by the 

preclear of a word or phrase in order to produce movement on the time track into an engram 





containing that word or phrase), but the fact is that that command will work out in this process 

as the case proceeds. 



So we have him put it down, and then have him go over to the window and pick up object two, 

and have him look at it, describe it -we have him describe it to keep him in two-way 

communication. We have him describe it verbally and have him feel the weight of it, and have 

him get its temperature, and then we have him put it down right where he picked it up. And then 

we have him go to object one, and we have him pick it up and describe it and feel its weight and 

feel its temperature and have him really ascertain this. We want to make certain that he did 

ascertain this, and that’s the one thing we hound him about through this process is make sure 

that he really feels the weight of it you see, that he really gets what temperature it is, that he 

really tells you what the colors are and the appearance of the object is. And put it down, and go 

over to position two and pick up that second object and get what its weight, its color, and its 

temperature is, and we have him put it down in the same place he picked it up from - be very 

insistent on that - and then have him go back to position one. 



How long do we do this? We do this until he can do it happy as a jaybird for about ten minutes 

without a single upset, until he can do this time after time and be just that cheerful about it. 



How long is it going to take you to do this? Fifteen hours? Well, of course you realize that an 

individual knows he would die if he were asked to do this for fifteen hours, and that the auditor 

would shoot himself long before that time! You realize this to be the case, and then go right 

ahead and do it for fifteen hours if necessary. The shortest time in which I have been able to do 

it effectively has been one hour. I got the preclear all the way from apathy, tears - real tears (real 

apathy too by the way), a horrible stomach ache, feet fell off at one point -preclear was 

absolutely sure of this - through rage, antagonism, contempt, boredom, apathy again, fear, anger, 

antagonism, contempt, apathy, grief, fear, antagonism, enthusiasm, apathy, and so on up again to 

the first time the guy had ever been on the first level of the Know to Sex Scale, to sexual 

excitement, to symbols, to anger, to laughter, to apathy, to sex again, and eatingness showed up 

there just as plain as could be. “Well I suppose I could eat the book. I suppose that’s what you 

want me to do now. Eat it. Well I won’t eat it, so there.” And another time - the other object, “I 

suppose I’m supposed to use this for sexual purposes now. That’s what you want. Isn’t it!” 

These various manifestations - until finally the case simply booted right up on the tone scale and 

stayed up there. He went through sex, and he went into effort, and then he said “Well, I don’t 

know, it’s exercise walking back and forth,” and went up to emotion. He began to very 

interested in the fact that he had had emotions regarding this process, that this process would 

make him emotional was now curious to him. He became rather curious about the process, the 

first time we’d gotten into curiosity even vaguely, and went on up to -all of a sudden 

tremendously brilliant visio (Visio: the ability to see in facsimile form something one has seen 

earlier so that one sees it again in the same color, dimension scale, brightness and detail as it was 

originally viewed) turns on, and then went on further until his sonic (Sonic: the ability to recall a 

sound so that one can hear it again as he originally heard it - in full tone and volume) picked up, 

and became intolerable, and then shut down again to a tolerable level. 



And the longest I myself have done this on a case is five and one half hours. That’s a long time. 

Actually, I didn’t ever while I was running this have any real tendency to get awfully bored. It’s 

enormously interesting how many kinds of reaction this simple process produces. 



One of the things they ascertain immediately is that you are trying to get them under complete 

control. They’re sure of this. They become sure of various things - all of them bad - concerning 

you as an auditor, if they’re having a bad time of it. A case that is under good control may do 

this for half an hour well-controlled, emotionally stable, doing it just fine, and then go to pieces, 

just can’t stand it any more, that’s all. 



And so you can expect, I suppose, that the entrance to many cases would be that you’ve got a 

very well behaved preclear for a little while, he was being social, and then boy did he go antisocial. 





Now this procedure, of course, utilizes duplication to an arduous, wicked extent. Duplication is 

an essential part of any communication, and if you want to get in communication with your 

preclear, you’d better get him so he can duplicate. This process does two things. It produces an 

effect, you can be sure of that, but it also produces a result, which is the only reason we’re using 

it, and produces that result faster than any other process I know of. 



Now we’ve all known that Opening Procedure was pretty good, but what part of Opening 

Procedure was really hot, since you could run anything in 8-C, any step of SOP 8-C could be 

run by Opening Procedure. You could make a fellow move around and do whatever that step 

was. It would take a little figuring on the part of the auditor to get this done, but that’s a fact. 

Well, duplication is tremendously important. It just can’t be over-emphasized in a case. And 

when Opening Procedure ran into Duplication we got an enormous effectiveness and where it 

was not used to level out duplication, but was used to produce random activity, it was not as 

effective, anywhere near. So we have this procedure built up this far now. We have: Two-Way 

Communication, find out if there’s a Present Time Problem, then we could do just a little bit of 

common ordinary Opening Procedure of 8-C, you know, just to get them used to the idea of 

moving around and not being embarrassed because they’re doing something kind of silly - they 

often think that -moves around the room, puts his hand on the table -and so on into 

Duplication by Opening Procedure with two objects, picking them up, feeling them, describing 

them, putting them down in the same place, picking up the second object, describing it, putting it 

down in the same place, and so on. 



What happens to a body when you run too much Opening Procedure on it? You’re bringing the 

body up scale as an entity. How long will it come upscale as an entity? Until it’s very restless. 

Well, there’s our point. There’s where your Opening Procedure collapses a little bit, or drops 

back, therefore it isn’t an end-all process, is it? You could probably run Opening Procedure 

long enough on a body to finally exteriorize the G.E. from the body - if you see that kind of a 

complexity. But, however you run it, everything the body’s been revolting against is likely to 

come to the surface immediately and intimately and abruptly. It’s likely to be quite violent. 

What’s the body doing? The body has been threatening these revolts for a long time. The thetan 

quite ordinarily has the body in indifferent control, and the body, of course, runs up through 

these things blasts through some of his ridges and the thetan discovers that he can handle the 

body regardless of what it is doing. That is what the thetan discovers and that’s why your 

Opening Procedure by Duplication is effective. It is more effective with the thetan exteriorized 

than interiorized - much more effective. But if we ran it long enough on the body itself, and if 

we addressed the body itself to run it, we would probably get some weird manifestation, some 

new phenomena showing up - something weird happening. We wouldn’t quite be prepared to 

say exactly what would happen. In the first place it’s not a possibility to audit this straight on 

the body. The body itself is an animal. On a stimulus-response level it has some intelligence, but 

if you started to drill that intelligence in any way it would have to come up through too many 

strata. 



But the point is: (1) Opening Procedure by Duplication is violent. (2) The condition attained 

after an hour and a half or so of Opening Procedure by Duplication can be expected in the next 

day or so to deteriorate, but not to the level where the preclear’s body tone was originally, and 

would have to be done again to that degree in order to pick up and stabilize the tone. I have done 

it three sessions running, each one about five days apart, and on the last session there was a 

stability attained simply by this processing. 



But this is not an end-all process. This process gets the case into shape so that he will do a good 

job of following your instructions and will do a good job of communicating, and it picks up the 

communication tone of the individual. Therefore the length of time you care to run this as an 

auditor is markedly shortened. 



If it were an end-all process, which itself went for broke, this would be the way you would run 

it. You would run it an hour and a half or something like that, or two hours, you would wait a 

day, two days, three days, something like that, you would run it for another hour or two, and you 

would go three or four days, and you would run it again on the preclear for fifteen minutes or a 





half an hour. And then you would have attained a stable state and you would have improved his 

condition. Run in that fashion it is an end-all process, but not run really in the fashion in which 

you would run it as an Opening Procedure. 



But let’s look now at how it is combined in a procedure to get the preclear out of his incipient 

explosion, so that it won’t get in your way as an auditor. And just consider Opening Procedure 

by Duplication, although it in itself is very beneficial, as something by which you, the auditor, 

are going to monitor the preclear so that he really will be able to do what you say. 



If a case were to find it consistently difficult to communicate with you, if a case were 

consistently seeing everything black, if a case were consistently occluded and consistently 

twisted your orders and so forth, you would simply have to, you would have no other choice but 

to, sit down and grind with Opening Procedure by Duplication on this case until he was actually 

out of the woods on it. Now how about the necessity for lapsed time between sessions? Well, 

actually it isn’t absolutely necessary. I’m talking now about professional auditing. This is how 

you would schedule these things optimumly. You would make just a little less progress by 

doing it a couple of hours a day for two or three days. You would invest perhaps thirty percent 

more auditing time because the case hadn’t had a chance to settle out, but you would get there. 

Two or three days, a couple or three hours a day. Letting the fellow settle out gets him matched 

back against his environment and saves you time in the long run. He goes back into his 

environment, he gets restimulated, then he comes back for an auditing session and he blows that. 

He goes into the environment again, and you actually, day by day, are getting another type of 

environment which you’re running out of the preclear. It would be an end-all process if you did 

it this way. It would be an answer in itself, just Opening Procedure by Duplication. That’s all 

you’d do with the preclear. 



Well, it’s a fantastic process in the way it will blow a case. If a case explodes or blows under 

this - there is no other process known which will break loose a covert communication line which 

is twisting a process. If a case blows that means the case had a tendency to twist a process, 

because he can’t duplicate entirely, and so he was sliding out of your hands, and as long as he 

can slide out of your hands as an auditor, he then will alter a process every time that process 

gets him into going which is too rough for him and he’s got to go through that rough going. 



And you won’t be able to drive him through with a concept. So you have Opening Procedure by 

Duplication standing there as the only thing known at this time which will push a case all the 

way through into a good communication and an ability to duplicate your auditing commands. If 

you just did this for a little while with a case, you would still get an improved communication 

line. If you did it for many, many hours with a case on consecutive days or consecutive weeks, 

you would get a total improvement in communication on the part of the case. This is a certainty. 

But where your case blows, gets upset or excited, you can look at this fact, that you must have 

invested - if you audited this case by other processes earlier - you must have invested a great 

deal of time trying to get the case “to break through the sound barrier”. The case didn’t. Now 

why does this require a little violence? One of the things that happens is that the individual 

knows that he mustn’t display any violence, and this technique brings him up to the point where 

he displays it, and he finds out nothing happened to him. This in itself gives him a tremendous 

confidence. Did you ever see somebody who got mad and then found out that nobody objected, 

and then was cocky evermore? Well, Opening Procedure by Duplication gets you there and 

saves you an enormous amount of time. The amount of time saved in this is probably in terms 

of scores of hours, if not hundreds. If you have a case that is hanging up, it might very well go 

right on hanging up unless you get as violent as Opening Procedure by Duplication. And if the 

case is hanging up to any degree, why you remedy of course his Opening Procedure by 

Duplication. It has its own role. It is in itself its own remedy, but what you’re trying to do as an 

auditor is blast through places where he would hang up and which it might take you years to get 

him through entirely. 



So it isn’t just a passing thought, this process. It seems to contain in it all those elements which 

go to make a case stable, and therefore is quite important to the auditor. But if an auditor works 





this without expecting violence, if he works this without expecting he’s going to have an awful 

time every few preclears, why he’s even more of an optimist than I am, which is impossible. 



TWO-WAY COMMUNICATION DURING OPENING PROCEDURE BY 

DUPLICATION 



A lecture given on 

3 December 1954 



When we say thetan we’re talking about an emanation point. We’re talking about a person. He 

writes letters, he greets you in a silly fashion, he does this, he does that. Let’s examine, for a 

change, the Cause end of this line. All too often one examines only the Effect end of the line, 

because that’s where interest gets centered. When we examine the Cause end of the line we 

discover something of tremendous interest about it: Cause, if it desires to get anything like an 

ARC effect at the Effect point, must take into consideration the fact that the Effect point is often 

quite incapable of mocking itself up as Cause. 



Here is CAUSE - DISTANCE - EFFECT. Now, to get perfect duplication it is necessary that 

Effect mock itself up in some fashion or other in order to get in the duplication of this Cause 

in order to receive the communication at all. 



To give you an example of that: you’re an American in France. Now a Frenchman comes up 

and he says, “Blotheree zomberfiel, ello blfthblorerup.” And you say, “Huh.” You weren’t an 

effect at all, really, not the kind of effect he intended. He wanted you to put your baggage on the 

van or something. And you sure get a kind of an only-one feeling when you wander around 

doing this a lot, and people come up to you who don’t speak English, don’t speak deaf and 

dumb, don’t speak



 237 



Boy Scout Semaphore. But they throw a lot of verbalization in your face which is supposed to 

mean something, and you don’t comprehend it. Furthermore, you are acutely aware of the fact 

that their customs are probably unfathomably strange. For instance, in France, if you’re an 

American, your idea of plumbing and the French idea of plumbing are two entirely different 

things. Two entirely different things. The whole problem of trying to walk into any civilization 

is actually the problem of being able to mock yourself up. You don’t willingly mock yourself 

up as a Frenchman. You don’t willingly mock yourself up as part and parcel of all these strange 

and outrageous customs. You could understand this quite easily on the Effect point, but how 

about the Cause point? The Cause point has, much more so than the Effect point, to mock itself 

up, because the Effect point mockup is being assisted by Cause, but the Cause point mockup is 

not being assisted, and it’s this fact - that it’s not being assisted - which causes people to think 

they need help. 



They get used to being on the Effect side, and when they get over on the Cause side they say, 

“Where’s all the help?” So they invent an analyzer and a computer and a Reactive Bank and all 

kinds of things in order to be over here at Cause point, because the Cause point has to mock 

itself up just like the Effect point or subordinate Effect points which are not really capable of 

any great change, which are not capable of mocking themselves up, and will never be 

communicated to, unless Cause mocks itself up. 



So in order to deliver an effect, Cause has to be able to mock himself up on a much higher self 

determinism than Effect because Effect is assisted in the mockup by Cause. 



The ability to be at Cause point is necessary for



 238 





good communication. You have to be able to be. In other words you have to be able to mock 

yourself up. If you, instantly, addressed by this Frenchman, were to mock yourself up as a 

French official, were you able to do this, you see, you would find suddenly that it was “all on 

the house”. Actually something would come out of an interchange of this character - you say 

suddenly, “What are you doing without your identification papers?” or something of the sort, 

and he would say, “Oui, Oui, merci, thank you very much, no checkee...uh...adios...” or 

whatever. You have to mock yourself up as something he recognizes as Cause, but what kind of 

a second sight would this take? What does this Effect recognize as Cause? You mock yourself 

up as what this Effect point normally recognizes as Cause, and that puts you on the Cause end 

of the line. It is therefore the Cause end of the line which you should examine, because that’s 

where, as an auditor, you’re trying to put the preclear. You’re not really trying to put the 

preclear at the Effect end of the line. Now if you understand that thoroughly - you’re getting 

what is meant by the increase of self determinism. We mean we’re increasing this preclear’s 

ability to be at the Cause end of the line. 



If the preclear came into the auditing room, and all he said was “Hehehehehe”, why, you would 

recognize that he is not quite at the Cause end of the line. In fact, he’s probably not at the Effect 

end either, he’s probably half way between the two points, being a communication particle. 



An individual can drift away from Cause point, get on the line itself, and become a particle on 

the line. If you walked up to him on the street and wrote an address on his chest and put a stamp 

on his forehead and put him into a mail box he’d be perfectly happy



 239 



about it. Such cases have become communication particles. They are a message. They don’t 

even have a message, they are one. The exhausted messenger throwing himself off his horse and 

dying at the king’s feet as he announces the defeat is being his message. There isn’t any reason 

why anybody should kill horses or messengers just to tell some king that he lost a couple of 

chunks of real estate, but they used to do it all the time. In other words these people could very 

easily be communication particles. Not cause or effect at all. 



The decline is simply from able Cause to fixed Cause - and then they start riding out on the line. 

From an Effect which can receive, to an Effect which has to receive, to an Effect which won’t 

receive. Desire, enforce, inhibit. Eventually somebody would be found avoiding all causes, 

avoiding being Cause, avoiding anything else which was Cause. Whatever they’d do they’d 

finally get on the line as a particle or symbol. They go from Cause into the state of Symbol, they 

go from Effect into the state of No Symbol, but they get on the line, they slide around, and they 

get mass, meaning, mobility. Now there’s nothing totally bad about this. But let’s restore this 

preclear’s ability. 



When you encounter a person who is incapable of addressing you physically or verbally in any 

acceptable way that makes an easy communication it is because he cannot change. He is fixed. 

If you, or the warden of a prison, or the soda jerk down at the corner drugstore, or the President 

of the United States walked in, he would be found in the same fixed state of address. 



Well, if he can’t change he is expecting continually that he’s going to be the Effect. So we have 

a preclear sitting there and it’s: “Well, you go on and audit. I’ll be effect.” They sit there in 

“can’t change”, unwilling to be Cause. So it’s up to you to get the preclear to the



 240 



point where he is at least conscious that he is moving something, that he is not being moved. 

That’s why you get him to go around touching walls and objects. 



But the essence of this is contained in duplication. This person cannot duplicate blitherarerup, 

therefore he can’t talk with you, but that’s true of him and all life. He recognizes his inability to 

duplicate life and he recognizes that he can’t get on a two-way communication basis with it in 





such a way that it then is assisted in its receipt. Life will receive your messages, if it recognizes 

that you are a communication source. How does it do that? Well you have to be like it. You have 

to assist its duplication. 



This does not mean that an auditor has to get down on the floor and grovel and duplicate all 

possible weird and bizarre things that a case could do, because actually all you’re duplicating 

there is the circuit (Circuit: a part of an individual’s bank that behaves as though it were 

someone or something separate from him and either dictates or takes over his actions. Circuits 

are the result of engramic commands.) but certainly an auditor could be called upon to duplicate 

any average motion. The person folds his hands, the auditor folds his hands. He sees then a 

physical gesture being duplicated. 



The common denominator of this inability is the duplication factor. In all this communication 

difficulty, there is basically this inability to duplicate - so much so that reality could be called 

and rephrased and redefined as: the degree of duplication. Affinity is actually the distance and 

the particle size. Communication of course is Cause-Distance-Effect. And the degree of 

duplication is what makes reality. You are as real to those around you as they can receive you. 

Did you ever get some kind of an inkling around your family



 241 



that they weren’t receiving what you were talking about? Well, that’s because they fixed in their 

minds a long time ago the fact that they were duplicating you little. You were different in size. 

This all by itself would be sufficient to make the family incapable of receiving information from 

you. Grandpop’s a fairly successful manufacturer, and he’s seen this grandson who’s been 

running around while grandpop was in his middle years, and the kid goes off and studies sales 

promotion, with all the verve of youth and a good background and a good inheritance on this 

whole line and boy he could give Grandpop cards and spades on the subject of promotion. He 

moves into Grandpop’s sphere of activity and he’s on the job. He puts a suggestion memo on 

Grandpop’s desk. Do you think it ever gets read? Ha ha, that’s just from Jimmy. And Jimmy 

goes out and starts to work for another company, and it starts selling the whole field and wipes 

out Grandpop. “He didn’t know what he was talking about.” Grandpop has already conceived 

the idea, you see, that the smallness of Jimmy is not a duplication. And that being his primary 

idea connected with this individual, he then knows that all he can receive really from this 

individual is “Ga-ga-ga-ga”, “Gimme a lolly pop” and “Gimme a nickel”. Something on this 

order would be within his basic communication line with this child, so afterwards he could not 

then take the child’s communication line seriously. But the child changes, grows up. The main 

impatience that you ever had with parents or anybody like that around you is their fixed idea that 

you are small. Then you come around later and your parents are getting on in years and they’re 

ailing and you say, “Why don’t you” - and give them some sensible suggestion - you’re going 

to help them. And you find out that almost anything you suggest is unacceptable,



 242 



because they know they can’t duplicate someone your size. They know, if they know anything, 

that you’re about a foot tall, or two feet tall - wherever they’re stuck on the track as far as 

you’re concerned. Mama very often gets stuck on the track at birth with the child, the first view 

of the child, and after that the child just doesn’t ever have a sensible solution to anything. But 

the child is actually better adapted to the modern environment than Mama is. 



Thus an odd thing could happen, if an auditor were not fully aware of this duplication factor in 

the beingness of the preclear. He could be under the delusion that the preclear is improving 

when the preclear is actually simply getting more like the auditor. Well, that is what the entire 

field of psycho-analysis is built upon: if we could just get the patient to be just like the analyst, 

why then we’d be all set. They apparently go through some magic rites, as I was taught - in 

order to accomplish what? - the patient’s shifting into the valence of the analyst. Well, the 

assumption by the preclear of a beingness other than his own - a valence - is not the goal of an 

auditor. The goal of an auditor is to return to the preclear more and more self-determinism. It is 





to make him capable of being at Cause point and at Effect point by his own self-determined 

choice. 



How many dozen ways could you run Duplication? You could run it the basic way. Highly 

stylized, very pure technique and simply run it like that. That is the most effective of all 

processes we know on duplication. 



If an auditor failed with this process it would be because he didn’t maintain two-way 

communication. He lets the preclear go on to an automatic endurance run without actually 

finding out what the preclear



 243 



really feels, really experiences, what it’s all about, what the sensations are. This doesn’t mean 

that the auditor even vaguely varies his auditing commands. The auditing commands are always 

the same. They’re given in the exact order in which they’re given in R2-17: Opening Procedure 

by Duplication. But let the preclear talk to you! That is the difference. If you don’t get him at 

the Cause point of the communication line, you’ve failed. So we make the preclear talk. 



How do we do this? We give the exact command. This is one thing an auditor must learn - to 

keep continually in two-way communication while you’re running any process without actually 

varying the process or coming an inch off the process, while you throw in on the 

communication line what is known as “dunnage”, the stuff you put around the cargo to keep it 

straight in a ship. 



The preclear goes over woozily and picks up the book. You say, “Look at it.” You ask him to 

describe it. 



He says, “Book?” Something’s wrong with this bloke’s communication! No, there’s nothing 

wrong at all. You see you’ve got to get those commands in there just exactly in the order in 

which they are given. You’ve got to get him to the book, to the bottle, to the book, to the bottle, 

to the book, to the bottle. Just exactly. And then if you failed to demand to be answered, by 

failing to insist that the action be knowingly accomplished, and by failing to listen when the 

preclear says something - you would lose. He’s picked up the book for the 565th time and all 

of a sudden the whole room goes purple, and he says, “My God!” 



And you say “What is its weight?” Well, cut your throat - you’ve just cut the preclear’s! Then, 

when



 244 



he says “Ooohhhh,” and you say “What happened?” it’s not going to do any good. You’ve 

missed it. 



When you see something happen to him, find out what it is. If you see that he’s really going 

through it like an automaton, for heaven’s sake pick him out of it. He’s told you for the 55th 

time, “It’s cool.” I’m not above putting some two-way communication in there, getting him to 

say something. For fifty-five times, automatically, he was saying “Cool”, “Cool”, “Cool”. He 

wasn’t feeling it any more. He was still running the command you gave fifty-five times ago. 

Now if you don’t make him communicate, if you don’t make him describe, and if you don’t 

listen to him, it all goes on an automaticity. It just goes on, and on, and on...and I swear if he ran 

it on a total automaticity, you could run it for 250 hours with no change in the preclear except 

that he’d get tired legs. 



Now the key to this thing is that each moment must be a new moment. Each action must be a 

new action. And gradually he peels apart these actions so they are different actions so that each 

moment is new, and that is the primary manifestation of Opening Procedure by Duplication. 

The newness of each moment. 





So when he just gets repetitive, repetitive, you get suspicious. You say “What color is that 

book?” I’ve even gone so far as to say to a preclear who has been describing the object as “a 

book”, “a book”, etc., - “Will you please describe it as an object.” New frame of reference. 

“Well...it’s a...it’s...it’s a...rectangular ...it’s a rectangular object...made out of 

paper...cloth...cloth on the outside. How about that! You know, books, they’re cloth on the 

outside.” He’s back into an interest in the process. I’ve seen this process run, by the way, with 

two typewriters!



 245 



That’s incorrect. They have to be two dissimilar objects. The preclear did get a lot stronger. 



You could even get that on automatic. But the second these responses become monotonous 

you’ll know that your preclear has simply settled down to being an Effect. You’re trying to get 

your preclear to be Cause. So let’s make him originate communications to you concerning the 

object. That doesn’t mean that each new communication has got to be new and original, but it 

does have to tell you that he is experiencing that instant and not some other instant. 



Opening Procedure by Duplication pulls apart all the moments of a time track. It pulls them 

apart because of the duplication. Unless each moment is a new moment you don’t have that 

occurrring. Book, bottle, book, bottle, book bottle, boooo - it’s a book! It’s not a word! Very 

difficult realizations come through to a preclear. 



You’ve got to know that your preclear can talk, and he must talk, and he must describe what is 

happening to him. When something happens he’s expected to call it to your attention, you’re 

expected then to pay some attention to it. 



That doesn’t mean you go off the process. But let him tell you about it. 



A preclear will exteriorize on Opening Procedure by Duplication. And when he’s just about 

ready to exteriorize and wants to tell the auditor about the fact that he’s just about to do this 

that is not the time to give the next auditing command or not be interested. The moment the 

auditor’s not interested there is no auditing going on. I’ve seen preclears who’ve just gone 

“dead in their heads” through not being permitted to communicate.



 246 



The auditor is not there to suppress communication on the part of the preclear. 



Remember that an obsessive overflow is not a communication. You have to know that. But 

actual communication on the part of the preclear must not be suppressed by the auditor. So 

there’s the trick, and it shows up in Opening Procedure by Duplication because you do have to 

keep to the exact process commands. He does have to go repetitively through these exact 

motions. But you have to make sure that he’s experiencing these things. You do that by 

communicating and you’ll find Opening Procedure by Duplication working for you much more 

speedily than it ever has before. You are not looking out the window when a preclear has an 

enormous piece of news to impart. You don’t sit there looking out of the window, auditing on a 

sort of prank basis - “Go over to the book, now touch that wall,” or something of this sort, and 

without letting the preclear communicate, because the preclear gets a very sudden tone drop as a 

result of this. It’ll actually stick him in his head. It has turned off perception. It will do all kinds 

of things. 



Letting the preclear talk, demanding the thing really be described, keeping it out of the automatic 

machine category, making each moment new and fresh in Opening Procedure by Duplication, 

and never varying its auditing commands - that’s how you win on this process. You can say 

other things than the auditing commands, but that doesn’t give you any license to vary the 

process. 





You just make sure that a communication is going on.



 247



 CHAPTER TWENTY-ONE



 VIEWPOINT STRAIGHTWIRE 



This is a process which is very simple, very easy to use, and makes continuous advances. This 

process is not mixed with other processes, it is not part of any Standard Operating Procedure. It 

is not part of anything you would do ordinarily. It doesn’t particularly apply to one case level or 

another case level. It is an independent process which in itself is very simple to administer. 



The formula of this process is: All the definitions and Axioms, arrangements and scales of 

Scientology should be used in such a way as to bring about a greater tolerance of such 

viewpoints on the part of the preclear. That means that any scale there is, any arrangement of 

fundamentals in thinkingness, beingness, could be so given in a straightwire process that it 

would bring about a higher state of tolerance on the part of the preclear. 



To make this more intelligible you should understand what a great many preclears are doing, 

and why an auditor occasionally has trouble with one preclear more than another. A great many 

preclears are being processed solely and entirely because they are unable to bring themselves to 

tolerate an enormous number of viewpoints, and being unable to tolerate these viewpoints they 

desire processing so that they can fall away from them and not have to observe them, and the 

auditor is auditing somebody who is in full retreat, and Scientology is being asked to aid and 

abet the



 248 



retreat by, for instance, taking the charge off an engram. The auditor at the same time, if he does 

this, gives the preclear something in the way of a change of viewpoint in that he erases 

something so that the preclear doesn’t have to view it any more. 



Well, as you can see, this is a weak direction. What the auditor then is doing is to some degree 

holding in question the ability of the preclear to tolerate viewpoints. Time itself may very well be 

caused by an intolerance of past viewpoints - a person doesn’t want viewpoints in the past, and 

so at a uniform rate he abandons past viewpoints, and when he no longer is following this 

uniform rate but is abandoning them faster than the uniform rate, he starts to jam up in terms of 

time, and becomes obsessed about time, becomes very hectic, begins to rush time, push hard 

against the events of the day, feels that he doesn’t have enough time to accomplish everything he 

is supposed to accomplish, and this falls off on a very rapid curve to a point where an individual 

will simply sit around idle, fully cognizant of the fact that he doesn’t have enough time to do 

anything. And so doesn’t do anything, but knows he should be doing something but can’t do 

anything because he doesn’t have enough time. This is idiocy itself, but is the state in which you 

find a very great many people. 



Time is the single arbitrary entered into life and is well worth investigating on the part of an 

auditor. An unwillingness to tolerate viewpoints will cause a jam in time. The fewer viewpoints 

which an individual will tolerate, the greater his occlusion and the worse his general state of 

beingness is. As I said, an auditor can remedy this in various ways. He can erase locks, 

secondaries and engrams (Lock, Secondary, Engram: A lock is a mental image picture of a non-

painful but



 249 



disturbing experience the person has experienced and which depends for its force on an earlier 

secondary and engram which the experience has restimulated. A secondary is a mental image 





picture containing misemotion [encysted grief, anger, apathy, etc.] and a real or imagined loss. 

These contain no physical pain - they are moments of shock and stress and depending for their 

force on earlier engrams which have been restimulated by the circumstances of the secondary. 

An engram is a mental picture of an experience containing pain, unconsciousness, and a real or 

fancied threat to survival; it is a recording in the reactive mind of something which actually 

happened to an individual in the past and which contained pain and unconsciousness, both of 

which are recorded in the mental image picture called an engram). And by erasing these, he can 

make it possible for the individual to “tolerate the view”, as he finds it in his own bank. Or, an 

individual can be so processed, as in exteriorization, that he can be caused to go around and look 

at various things and find out that they are not so bad. 



Now, let’s just take the mean between these two, and realize that a person who doesn’t 

exteriorize is a person who does not want an exteriorized viewpoint. He does not feel he can 

tolerate an exteriorized viewpoint. He may have many reasons for this and one of the main 

reasons he will give is the consideration that someone may steal his body. In other words here 

you have a tremendously valuable viewpoint which he’s likely to lose if he exteriorizes. 

Viewpoints then must be scarce, viewpoints are all obviously too valuable to be used. And this 

comes about by viewpoints becoming intolerable. Let’s take somebody standing and watching 

his family being butchered by soldiers or something of this sort, Indians or other wild people. 

He would



 250 



go along afterwards so intolerant of this viewpoint that he would fixate on it. It’s the fact that he 

refuses to tolerate the viewpoint which makes him fixate on it. Now the reason for this lies in the 

various Agree-Disagree scales in the Philadelphia Doctorate Course lectures - the fact that if 

you want anything, in this universe, you can’t have it, and that if you don’t want it, you’re going 

to get it. This is an inversion, and when this inversion comes about, an individual finds himself 

overwhelmed each time on whatever his own determinism is. If he starts to desire something he 

will find out immediately that he can’t have it. Actually, he himself will take steps to make sure 

that he can’t have it. When he wants something to flow in, it flows out, when he wants 

something to flow out, it flows in. There is nothing more pathetic, for instance, than watching a 

psychotic try to give up any material object - trying to make them hand over or give up, or throw 

away one possession, such as an old Kleenex, almost anything - just try to make them give it up. 

No, no, they just won’t do it. They clutch it to them and I swear that if you handed them an 

adder, wide-mouthed and fully fanged, they would clutch it to their bosom. Anything that comes 

in they immediately seize and that’s that. 



Now you as an auditor, every time you are trying to get someone to give up something, are 

asking them to give up a compulsive viewpoint. You will see that every time you ask someone to 

give up something he is likely to hold it closer. 



Now there are many processes. There are a great many processes, there are all the Standard 

Operating Procedures, and in good hands they all work. There’s Universe Processing, there’s 

Advanced Course Procedure, there’s Creative Processing, on and on and on



 251 



and on, a tremendous number of techniques, which can be applied with good sense to preclears. 

There are an enormous number of Straightwire processes, there’s old-time Straightwire. The 

earliest Straightwire we had, which, by the way, was a marked advance on Freudian analysis, 

went like this: say we noticed that the preclear is afraid of cats. We would say: “Recall a time 

when you were afraid of cats”, then: “Recall somebody who was afraid of cats”, and then: 

“Find a time when somebody said you were like this person”. That was approximately its 

formula -just Straightwire, and you sprung apart these valences very gently. However, it 

required a great deal of good sense on the part of the auditor. 





An auditor now and then would become a Straightwire expert, and by just asking searching 

questions and causing the individual to recall certain things he would bring about a great deal of 

relief on the case. Why did the relief take place? The individual has been going along in the full 

belief that he could not tolerate a certain viewpoint and the auditor has come along and 

demonstrated to him that that viewpoint was in the past and therefore is tolerable. There, in 

essence, are the fundamentals of such Straightwire. You get key-outs (Key-out: Release or 

separation from one’s reactive mind or some portion of it) on this - the individual comes up to 

present time so that he isn’t looking in the past - assuming a past viewpoint. That is a goal of a 

great many processes, and is quite different from “wipe out the past so he won’t have to look at 

it or experience it”. 



We have in Viewpoint Straightwire a very, very, new type of thinking. This is not to be confused 

with what we have been doing for all these many years. It hasn’t any connection with it. It has 

an entirely different goal



 252 



from that of any process you’ve ever done on a preclear. It takes the benefit of exteriorization, 

and reduces it to Straightwire. We get an individual to race around the universe to look at things 

observe things, experience things. That’s a Grand Tour (Grand Tour: The process R1-9, in The 

Creation of Human Ability by L. Ron Hubbard.) - that sort of drill - and here we reduce it right 

down to a Straightwire which is done interiorized or exteriorized. 



One simply goes on the basis that the preclear is in the state he’s in because he’s not tolerating 

many viewpoints, and the entire goal of the process is to bring him to a point where he will 

tolerate viewpoints. That’s all there is to the process. 



The key wording of the process is “you wouldn’t mind”. Why do I announce this as 

something important, something new, something that is very useful to you? There are many 

varieties of viewpoint. If we were to take Full Knowingness, and squash it, we would find we 

were first getting into space, which would be perception. We have to perceive to know. This is 

the level of Lookingness. Now if we condense that we find out that we have to get Emote to 

know. A person has to emote. We squash perception, and we go into Emotion to know. Now, if 

we squash down and condense even further, we get Effortingness, and if we condense Effort 

even further, we get Thinkingness, and if we condense and package Thinkingness, we get 

Symbols. As an example of this, what is a Word but a package of thought, and if we were to 

condense Symbols, we would get actually the wider definition of the symbol - we would get 

animals. You are probably thinking of it in terms of a viewpoint of a body, if you don’t see that 

clearly, but the definition of a symbol is a mass with meaning, which is mobile. That is a symbol 

and of



 253 



course that is an animal, too. An animal has certain form which gives him certain meaning and 

he is mobile, and if you see that the Thinkingness condenses, then, into form, you will 

understand art. Just in so many words, a very simple thing. 



We have Thinkingness condensing into Symbolizingness, ideas condensing into actually solid 

objects, and when these are mobile, we have symbols, and when these symbols are observed, 

they are found to wind themselves up with other symbols and take an associate, they associate 

with one and another, and take things from one and another, and you get Eatingness. That’s a 

big, big band we’re covering in there, that’s the whole business of: “I have an idea about a form 

in this space and matter, and I’m going to get it all together, and I’m going to make this all mass 

together.” Well, the second we’ve done that, something has been created. Now don’t expect 

that thing which has been created to create anything. This is a thing which isn’t creating, and 

therefore must subsist on an interchange of energy, and we get eating. Now we take eating and 

condense it down, that is to say, let’s make food scarce, and let’s make it very hard to get, and 





we get a condensation which completely escapes time itself, and you go outside of time and you 

get Sexingness. 



That is to say that outside of present time, you get future time, which is sex. 



An individual is right straight off the time track between Eating and Sex, and there’s nothing 

will float on a time track like a sexual engram. They just float all over the time track. They don’t 

nail down at all. They are very mobile. The individual, in Eatingness, starts to slide out of 

present time by this token alone, and people are terribly worried about how are they



 254 



going to eat tomorrow, and when they have reduced this down to the reductio ad gastronomy 

you get to a point where “I can’t solve this problem of eating tomorrow, therefore I’d better just 

leave it all up to somebody else,” and slide in on the genetic protoplasm line and go up the line 

a little bit, and get another form, and be that. 



That’s the best way to solve eating - just to live tomorrow and maybe tomorrow there will be 

more food. 



A very readily available test will demonstrate this. Notice those countries of the world which 

breed faster and harder than other countries of the world. We find India and China doing this. 

And we find that these are two countries which have extreme, chronic food scarcity. Now we can 

say, well look, they have the greatest food scarcity because they keep breeding people, and that 

eats up all their food. No, it’s the other way around. They eat up all their food, and so they 

breed like mad. This can be tested also with animals. If you starve an animal, an animal will 

procreate faster. If you were, for instance, to give any family of homo sapiens a carbohydrate 

diet with a very, very low protein content -by the way this would be, you’d say, terribly 

unconducive to the production of estrogen, androgen. It’s proven to be very unproductive of it 

but if you give them a high carbohydrate, very low protein diet, the next thing you know they’ll 

start to get very anxious about breeding. That’s because you’re telling them in essence right 

where they can understand it in their stomachs that they are unable to obtain enough food today, 

and so must eat tomorrow. Therefore you get countries of the Western hemisphere, which are 

very heavily starch dieted, and you find out that these countries are the most anxious



 255 



about breeding and about tomorrow. There is no reason to stand around and prove this for 

hours. It’s just the Know-to-Sex scale. Condensed knowingness. 



“I don’t know how I’m going to get along today therefore I’d better breed like mad and appear 

tomorrow and maybe I’ll know then,” is about the last ditch. Well, if you notice this, death must 

come, in this band, above sex. A person presupposes his own death to indulge in the protoplasm 

line. And so we get people like Schopenhauer and The Will and the Idea closely associating sex 

and death, and we get certain animals and insects, which so closely associate sex and death that 

they have accomplished death when they have accomplished sex. Fear Merchants (Fear 

Merchants: The aberrative personality. This was an early description of what is known as a 

Suppressive Person, or the Anti-Social Personality) like to tell you about the black widow 

spider. I don’t know why the black widow spider is such an attractive beast to some people, but 

it is apparently so. I noticed that it exists mainly in California - Southern California. Lots of 

black widow spiders down there, and most California girls, if you get into any kind of 

discussion on the second dynamic at all, will sooner or later inform you that the female black 

widow spider eats its mate after consummation of the sexual act. Anyway, the main thing here is 

that actually when you go down this scale, although it doesn’t belong on the scale, you’ll find 

death just before sex. Know, Look, Emote, Effort, Think, Symbol, Eat, Death, Sex. Death 

doesn’t belong there, but this shows you where this mechanism comes in. 





Now, beingness might also be on this scale somewhere. Beingness might be on this scale, and if 

it were, you would have a tendency to look for it up toward the top, but the truth of the matter is, 

it’s all up and down



 256 



the scale, and there is no beingness like that beingness at Symbols. You find the human race 

having been made into a form - a mass, meaning, mobility. A mass with meaning which is 

mobile - that’s a body, that’s a word in a dictionary, that’s a flag above a building, it can be 

moved around and it has meaning. You’ll find that human beings indulge very, very heavily in 

being symbols. Well, you’ll find people around being sexual objects too. So that this scale sort 

of interlocks on beingness. A fellow could be some effort -and actually we don’t find 

beingness at the top of the scale at all, we find it down there pretty low on the scale, so when an 

individual has gotten to a point where he has to be something, he’s practically at bottom. A 

further examination would have to put beingness at least at Symbols. A person becomes things 

at that level, and you will frequently find a preclear mainly being his name. 



Looking further, we find that there are different kinds of viewpoints. There is something you 

might call a know-point. That would be senior to a viewpoint. An individual would not have 

dependency on space or mass or anything else. He’d simply know where he was. There would 

be a viewpoint, which is a perception point, which would consist of look, and smell, and talk, and 

hear, and all sorts of things could be thrown in under this category, viewpoint. Ordinarily we 

simply mean at that level of the scale, looking, but you can throw all the rest of the perceptions 

in at that level of the scale. 



Going down a little bit from there we get something we could call an emotion-point. It would be 

that point from which a person emotes, and at which he emoted, and then there would be 

something else called an effort-point, and the effort-point would be that area from which a 

person exerted effort, and that area into



 257 



which that person received effort. And as we went down a little bit from that, we’d find we had a 

thinking-point, and there of course we get the “figure-figure-figure”. The person is thinking 

there, not looking. And if we go down a little bit further than this from a thinking-point, we get a 

symbol-point, and there, really properly, we get words. And below that we get an eating-point, 

and below that we get a sex-point. 



If you considered each one of these points below known as an effort to make space, a great deal 

of human behavior would make sense. Let’s take an individual who is simply trying to make 

space with words. Words don’t make good space. So an individual who tries to make space 

with words sooner or later gets into bad condition. Much lower than that would be a person who 

is trying to make space with eating. Of course that’s inverted, isn’t it? And then there’s the 

person who is trying to make space with sex, and that is really inverted. That goes both ways 

from the middle. The lowest part of the eating scale is excreta and urine. People will try and 

make space with that. Dogs, for instance, are always trying to make space that way. 



There are people who are trying to make space with effort. This is the use of force, this is 

Ghengis Khan riding out and slaughtering villages. He’s trying to make space. You notice that 

the space had to exist before he could ride out any place. 



And we go up a little higher, and maybe you’ve known somebody who’s tried to make space 

with emotion. And we go up a little higher and we get to the way you do make space which is by 

looking. And actually you get to make space by knowing. If you just knew there was some 

space, there would be some space, and that would be all there was to that. Just



 258 





that simple. That’s an effective way to go about it, and looking is another effective way to go 

about it, and when we get down to emotion, that is getting ineffective. People who try to make 

space with emotion don’t get very far. That’s literally, actually, figuratively, or any other way 

you want to look at it. It’s too condensed, and it kicks back. Yet that is above the individual who 

makes space by working hard or by pushing hard or by exerting force. 



In other words we see that there is quite a little bit of band there, at effort, and you’ll see that 

they get less far than people who try to make space with emotion. And now we get into the 

thinking band, and people who try to make space with thinking, which is about the most 

unworkable activity that anybody could engage in. 



When we get down to making space with symbols, here is a nation trying to fly its flag over all 

the world, which doesn’t make much space, and then we go into eating, and an individual trying 

to make space by offering things to be eaten. A cattleman, for instance, is doing this. He’s 

making space with cattle. And a fat man is trying to make space with food, and so on. Now 

when we get down into sex, of course, if an individual could breed fast enough and far enough 

he would wind up with all sorts of space, he thinks. Of course, he winds up with no space. This 

is the most condensed activity you can get into: sex. You can see somebody’s bank all short-

circuited - jammed on sex. But remember, we are looking at a gradient scale that runs from 

Sexingness right on up through the levels to Knowingness. 



And if anybody comes along and tells you that sex is the only aberration, please laugh. You 

could answer, Yes, that was how we entered the problem, we found nut that people were loopy 

on the subject of sex. So



 259 



then we examined the problem further, and having examined the problem for many years, it was 

discovered that sex was part of a gradient scale of human experience which is basically an 

activity of trying to make space, and people try to make space in various ways. And when they 

get down too low on the scale they are abandoning present-time life and at that point they have 

sunk to the level of Sexingness. They are trying in this way to get some future up there on the 

track and it is a chaos. It is an attempt to derive experience from external sources, and to pull 

experience in. 



Operation at the level of Sexingness is really a cave-in. 



When you examine this band and its inversions up and down the scale you see that it gives us 

an enormous number of Straightwire questions. 



The basic question would reduce this first from the stand-point of viewpoint of the whole scale, 

and that is where you catch your preclear most ably. You just take viewpoint of the scale, 

viewpoint of sex, viewpoint of effort, and so forth. 



The systematic questions that go into this line would be as follows: you ask the preclear to give: 



“Something you wouldn’t mind knowing.” 



“Something you wouldn’t mind looking at.” 



“An emotion you wouldn’t mind observing.” 



“Some effort you wouldn’t mind observing.” 



“Some thinking which you wouldn’t mind observing.” 



“Some symbols which you wouldn’t mind seeing.” 





“Some eating which you wouldn’t mind inspecting.” 



“Some sex which you wouldn’t mind looking at.” 



Just as mildly and quietly as that. And that’s Viewpoint Straightwire.



 260



 CHAPTER TWENTY-TWO



 REMEDY OF HAVINGNESS AND SPOTTING SPOTS IN SPACE 



Spotting Spots in Space and the Remedy of Havingness is itself a total process. It has many 

ramifications. It is, you might say, a family of processes. There are many such families of 

processes, but actually it belongs to the family that we would call Opening Procedure of 8-C or 

the Opening Procedure family. This is actually a low order of Change of Space so it belongs 

also to another family, it belongs to a Duplication family, since Change of Space is actually a 

dramatization of the formula of communication. In Change of Space you dramatize the 

communication formula with the preclear exteriorized. (You have him be at one point then be at 

another point, then be at the first point and be at the second point, etc.) 



That first point is the source point of something, usually, and so he - by being the cause and 

then being the effect and finding out there is a vast distance between them - becomes rather 

relaxed about the whole thing. But Spotting Spots and Remedying Havingness could then be 

said to be cousins to two families - to Change of Space and to Opening Procedure. 



The reason why we relate it to Opening Procedure is that that is the way you are going to 

produce the most effect with it. As though it were Opening Procedure. 



The first contest is to get the preclear to find the



 261 



spot in space. That is the first contest. The preclear will go around and he will find large spots, 

two or three feet in diameter. He’ll go around and find only spots which come out so far from 

the walls. He can’t find a spot independent of the room itself. His spots have energy in them, 

they have masses, they have color, they have size. In other words he runs into a lot of trouble. If 

he does locate a spot it’s likely to be “suspended four or five feet above the floor on something 

that looks like a microphone stand”. 



The various manifestations which occurr are quite fascinating, but all of them are completely 

useless. You want to get the preclear over these as fast as possible. 



You get him over them simply by having him spot some more spots in space. That’s all. Space 

where? In the space of the room. And you have him locate these spots in such a wise that he can 

go over and put his finger on them. Now, when you have him capable of spotting two or three 

spots, you’ve usually shot his havingness to ribbons. So you have to remedy havingness right 

away. If he starts to get queasy, sick, upset in any way remedy his havingness. 



There’s nothing more destructive to havingness than spotting some spots in space. 



This is a precision action - you want him to spot a spot in space and then be able to spot it 

again. That spot is only a location. It doesn’t have mass, and you want him to be able to put his 

finger on it and take his finger off of it, and put the finger of his other hand on it, and take it off, 

and move his body into it and move his body out of it and so forth. This is a location, and the 

more certain he becomes of these locations the better he is, and the next thing you know - why, 

he’s able to tolerate space. And you accomplish this by remedying havingness all the way 

along. 





 262 



Now let’s suppose you had an individual who had an enormous struggle in spotting some spots 

in space, and the first spots he spotted were fairly large, and you just kept on nagging him until 

he finally got actually a location in space - and he started to get sort of upset. Remedy of 

Havingness had not been done yet, and he feels rather queasy about the whole thing. Then you 

say, “All right, mock up something that’s acceptable to you and pull it in,” and he says, “What 

mockup?” And you say, “Well, just put something out there - a dead body.” “What dead 

body?” “What are you looking at?” “Nothing.” “What are you actually looking at?” 



An interesting contest will come in at this point - getting him to tell you what he is looking at. 

What he’s looking at in this case is usually blackness, and he won’t tell you he’s looking at 

blackness. This is “nothing” as far as he is concerned, but he’s looking at blackness, and to get 

him to finally tell you what he actually is looking at is part of your first contest. “What are you 

looking at?” Well, it doesn’t do you very much good with an individual who can’t get any 

facsimiles, mockups, anything of the sort whatsoever, to mock something up and pull it in, 

because he’s going to have too hard a time. 



But supposing he can get a vague or indistinct image out there. Is that good enough? Yessir, 

that’s good enough. Have him mock up several of those and pull them in on the body, and then 

go on spotting spots in space. 



But supposing he couldn’t get any. None. 



Then enters upon the scene this interesting single straightwire question. The agreement between 

the MEST Universe and the preclear gets down to a point where the preclear has agreed entirely 

that two things



 263 



cannot occupy the same space, and after that he is not able to pull anything in, which is the 

biggest trap you have, because the way a preclear makes something disappear, makes it vanish 

utterly is to pull it all the way in, and if he can’t pull anything all the way in it continues to 

persist. How would someone fix up a being so that he’s packed in energy masses? By getting 

him to agree that two things could not occupy the same space, and after that he couldn’t destroy 

any energy mass that was around him. Quite Machiavellian. Well, Count Alfred Korzybski 

devoted a book to this called, “Science and Sanity”, and there are others who have written on 

this subject, but they go back to Korzybski, and: “It is utterly impossible for two things to 

occupy the same space.” And if that book has any message, it says, Differentiate amongst your 

words and statements and thoughts, and, two things can’t occupy the same space. You nearly 

summate General Semantics when you say those two things. Now, there is a lot to this, you 

understand. He examined the mechanics of this, but he examined them in complete agreement 

with the physical universe. With somebody who has studied General Semantics, you’ve got a 

picnic on your hands in doing a Remedy of Havingness. You wouldn’t have realized it or 

recognized it but you have. He can’t pull anything in. He can’t remedy havingness and 

therefore can’t destroy energy. Why can’t he? Well, two things can’t occupy the same space, so 

if he wanted to mockup a car out there to pull it in and remedy his own mass, he of course 

couldn’t do it because he is already occupying the spot where the car would come into, therefore 

he couldn’t remedy his havingness. The mockup disappears just before it gets to him, and the 

underlying agreement back of that is two things can



 264 



not occupy the same space. This is of course an utter falsity. 



It happens to be a condition which when imposed resulted in this physical universe. That law is 

what keeps the parts and parcels and spaces and planets of this universe apart. It is an enforced 





differentiation in this universe which makes space for this universe. That is the law which keeps 

the space stretched in this universe. So of course Korzybski would get all involved with 

differentiation. Differentiation on the basis of the MEST universe holding itself apart. Well, that 

isn’t differentiation. So as a result you’ll have trouble at this point with anybody who has been 

in General Semantics. Here is this mockup disappearing just before it gets to him - in other 

words he isn’t remedying havingness. Now, how do you know he isn’t remedying havingness? 

Because he stays upset, of course. That’s all. 



He’s spotted some spots in space, and “these aren’t anything you can feel”. It just made him 

feel kind of frantic, and made him feel kind of upset, and made him feel sick at his stomach 

these are common manifestations - and then you said, “Mock up an acceptable...”, and he says, 

All right. And you say, “Well, have you got a dead body there, or what have you got mocked up 

there?” and he says, “Well, I don’t know - I’ve got a wrecked car,” and you say, “Well, okay. 

Pull that wrecked car into your body. Now pull another one into your body, and pull another 

one into your body, and pull another one into your body”. And you say, “How do you feel?” 

“I feel...just as frantic as I did,” and so on. He isn’t pulling anything into his body. It’s 

disappearing before it gets to him, it’s dissipating and other things are occurring there, so that 

his havingness isn’t being remedied.



 265 



By the way there’s a total process on this. You just simply have the fellow mock up things and 

pull them into his body, and the more massive the better, until you get planets and stars and 

black suns and all kinds of things being pulled into his body, and you’ll start something called 

an avalanche after a while, and the planets start coming in with a roar, and it’s quite an 

interesting phenomenon. I’ve seen one run for three or four days. They blow up every facsimile 

that gets in their road, they’ll blow up the entire energy behavior pattern of the preclear if you 

keep on remedying havingness. 



But if remedying havingness doesn’t straighten him out it’s because he has agreed to this single 

agreement which doesn’t happen to be true, that two things cannot occupy the same space. He’s 

agreed to that so thoroughly that he can’t remedy his havingness. 



The reason I’m stressing this is so that you will remember why you ask the preclear this 

question (and that this is the question, and that there isn’t any other question) and that question 

is simply this -“What wouldn’t you mind having occupy the same space as you’re 

occupying?” 



Well, he’s got to change his mind immediately, and two things can occupy the same space, in 

order to fulfill this condition, and without your explaining to him how, he had to change his 

mind. 



Sometimes it takes them five minutes, sometimes it takes them five hours, but the roughest case 

I know of at this time had to be given this for two hours before he could finally accept 

something in his own space. That is to say, until he could find something that he wasn’t 

unwilling to have occupy the same space as himself. And this question was asked this case over 

and over and over and over. This case had never been



 266 



able to remedy havingness, never been able to get mockups, never been able to do this, never 

been able to do that. Well, he remedied his havingness, and he got into fine fettle and doing very 

well indeed. This changed his case. If you’re doing a lot of Change of Space you remedy 

havingness on the thetan. Have him put up eight anchor points and have him pull them in on 

himself, and eight more and pull them in on himself, eight more and pull them in on himself. 

When his body gets upset and restive, we simply do this. If he really pulls them all the way in 

they will disappear. That is how you make things disappear. All space is an illusion, therefore if 

you pull in all anchor points of course there’s no space, so what happened to the anchor points? 





Well, they didn’t exist in the first place, so if you make them occupy the same space as you 

they’ll vanish, and actually recognition simply depends on occupying the same space with. 

That’s why Beingness Processing works. 



On this factor of recognition and knowingness in terms of beingness and facsimiles, etc., we 

simply get this: is he willing to occupy the same space as it? And if he is, it will blow, and if he 

isn’t it won’t. So if we get a case who can’t remedy his havingness being therefore unable to 

destroy a concept, a lock, a secondary, and an engram. If he can’t remedy havingness, he can’t 

occupy the same space with. If he can’t occupy the same space with, he naturally conceives that 

it’s making space, so therefore it has validity. And it won’t pull all the way in. 



This process is very elementary but it could be hashed up most gloriously by over-running the 

preclear on spotting spots in space until he was good and groggy, upset and quite ill, and then 

expecting him to work in some fashion or another. Well, you would have



 267 



driven him down tone scale to the point where he can hardly hold onto anything long enough to 

do anything about it. So, you’re now going to remedy his havingness and do the rest of this? 

No, you do this early. Remedy his havingness long before he needs to have it remedied. You 

don’t wait for signs. You could make them appear if you wanted to, but you just do this as a 

routine process. Whenever you spot a spot in space you remedy havingness, that’s all. 



The process we’re interested in is this one: Spotting Spots in Space. We’re not really interested 

in remedying havingness because this is only dramatizing his dependency on it, so we’re just 

giving priority to the important thing here, and the priority is the spot in space, that’s what’s 

important. The remedy of havingness is incidental. 



Why does his havingness chew up? There must be something awfully wrong with the way this 

fellow’s handling energy for his havingness to chew up simply by trying to remedy it. All right, 

what do we do here specifically? We ask him what could occupy the same space as he’s 

occupying. If we had any doubt about this, and here’s where we get the answer to your question 

about that, if we had any doubt about this we would take up this problem before we fooled 

around with any spots in space. We would look at this fellow and there he is gaunt and 

emaciated or bloated, or anything strange with his physiology - and we would say “Oh, this guy 

has a little bit of trouble with havingness.” You know, he’s a banker or something. We could 

tell professionally. He’s a commissar, a banker or a general? There’s something wrong with 

this guy’s havingness, otherwise he wouldn’t be where he is, that’s obvious, if he has to have in 

some other fashion than simply having. Using a system like



 268 



“becoming a general”. That’s a method of having, you see. You go to West Point, and don’t 

talk back, and graduate, and don’t talk back, and get into a War Department post, and don’t talk 

back, and coast along, and don’t talk back, and then you have to, of course, get more and more 

suppressed about how famous you’ve got to be and the next thing you know, why, you will start 

to accumulate troops to remedy your havingness...and you’ve got a U.S. General. You don’t do 

anything with the troops, just accumulate them. That’s not just being snide about generals. You 

can look at somebody and tell whether or not he’s having a lot of trouble with havingness. If 

he’s having trouble with havingness, then it might be very wise for you to just sail in on that 

basis. Let’s fix it up quick before we render him liable to anything. That would be a good idea. 



But what’s important about this process is Spotting Spots in Space. What do we do with all 

these spots in space? We just spot them, that’s what. Well, I know, but what do you do with 

them after you spot them? Well, you spot them. Well, after you’ve spotted them then what do 

you do with all these spots in space? Well, you spot some more of ‘em. That’s what you do. 





Don’t look for any deeper significance in the technique than that except this: the preclear is 

sitting on three kingpin significances, (1) that he’s there but he’s gotta leave, (2) that he’s there 

and fixed there forever - being fixed against his will, and (3) that “it was there iu that spot but 

now it is gone”. Three considerations there that are very aberrative on the track. Well, you could 

run these with this process. You spot a spot in the room and have him move the spot into his 

body. Have him stand there. You tell him: “Now get the idea that you can’t remain there. All 

right. Find



 269 



another spot. Okay. Now move out of the spot you’re in and move this next spot into your 

body. You got that? All right. Now get the idea that you can’t stay there.” 



You just do this in sequence. He’s in the spot, “Now get the idea that...” and you are making 

him dramatize the basic formula of self-determinism, the location of objects in space. And if you 

make him locate objects in space one after the other he’ll make considerable gains. Put this 

consideration onto it, that he can’t stay there, and have him move to the next spot. You just spot 

the spot and have him move to it, and you can run the consideration that he can’t stay there. 



And we have him move onto a spot and then get the idea that he’s fixed there and can’t move, 

then we have him change his mind, not just break or disobey his postulate, we have him change 

his mind, and pick out a new spot, and move into it, and get the idea he’s got to stay there 

forever, and then have him change his mind about staying there forever and get a new spot and 

move it into his body and get the idea he’s going to stay there forever. You’d be surprised at the 

agony and weariness and tiredness that this one runs. 



The next level is to have him spot the spot and get the idea that something very precious has just 

left there that he will never see again. You have him do this: just walk around and spot these 

spots and get the idea each one has just been vacated. There is the manifestation of the fellow 

trying to fill in the spots with energy - the mechanism that he’s undergoing, and it has a 

tendency to blow this. 



So there are three conditions - there are probably others, but those are certainly important 

conditions. Why? Well, what is the manifestation of facsimile? The manifestation of facsimile is 

not being able to



 270 



remain in a spot, having to get out, and cussedly taking along a picture of it so that one can say 

he’s still there. That’s the rationale behind the facsimile. The facsimile is the solution to the 

problem. 



So then, what is this thing called unreality? Unreality is that activity the preclear has engaged 

upon whenever he was forced to stay in a place where he did not want to be. His answer to this 

was to make it all unreal, so that he wouldn’t really know he was there. He’s trying to be self-

determined anyhow, and the way he’s being self-determined is to make it all unreal. He could 

say, “Although I am forced to stay here in prison, stone walls do not a birdcage make.” That’s 

why they put psychotics in cells. (Well, that didn’t quite add up to a solution. That’s just a 

reason as reasonable as anything else in that field, which has to do with nuttiness, so don’t 

expect it to be reasonable.) 



All right, he’ll make things unreal then, if forced to stay in the same place. He’ll dim down his 

perceptions on things. That merely says that he’s unwilling to be there. 



Now what’s this thing called occlusion? Occlusion comes about as the consequences of loss. 

Something precious has disappeared from the person, and if he could still see, he’d notice it was 

gone, and this would be more than he could bear, so the best thing to do would be to cover it all 

up with blackness and that’d be that. That would be a good solution, wouldn’t it? Let’s just hide 





the whole thing. Let’s just hide the problem and then let’s just abandon the whole idea, and 

then, you see, we could still pretend that it’s still there. 



This is the basis of “it’s too good to use”, also. People will get to the point where if you give 

them something extremely valuable they will not wear it or



 271 



use it. They promptly hide it. Well, that’s because they know, if they know anything, that they 

lose things like that. I remember giving a very dear lady, my grandmother, a present one day 

because she was going around wearing a watch that was a shame - very disreputable - and I gave 

her a new watch, and she kept right on wearing this old disreputable watch. And later on I was 

going around looking for something and opened up a drawer, and there hidden in the bottom of 

the drawer was this brand new, very nice, rather indestructible, by the way, good watch. And I 

asked her why she wasn’t wearing it and she said, “Oh, that’s much too nice to use.” And so I 

began to wonder about this a little and went back and just glanced through some of her things 

there, and do you know she had more things that were too nice to use! It was a tremendous 

abundance. She couldn’t use it, though, it was all too nice. 



Well, people do this in another way. When they’ve lost something they turn everything black. 

They just hide it and they hide the fact that they’ve lost it. Also this is “no responsibility” and 

other factors. And occlusion adds up to too many considerations. Actually the basic occlusion is 

mystery. Unpredictability. “It’s gone and I didn’t predict it would went, and so...it’s all black.” 

Well, here you’re making the preclear predict that something is going to disappear. 



So there are these methods of handling spots in space, and these are the main considerations. 

Now, don’t for a moment believe that there are eighty-five other considerations that can be 

added into that type of processing. The basic Pre-logic on which this is based is a very precise 

thing. It says: Theta locates things in time and space and creates time and space and things to 

locate in them. Self-determinism is one’s ability to



 272 



locate things in time and space, and this is directly processing self-determinism, so it doesn’t go 

out in all directions. It’s right there and it’s on those three considerations: the consideration of 

loss, the consideration of “I got to stay here so I’ll make it all unreal,” and the consideration of 

“Well, I can’t have that place any more so I’ll carry a picture of it.” Most of your preclears 

whether they know it or not are walking around with a childhood home over their heads. They 

can’t have that spot any more - the orientation place - so they think, to see at all they’d better 

carry it around with them. 



Now Spotting Spots and Remedy of Havingness - between the two of them the more important 

is Spotting Spots - and the consequence of Spotting Spots is having to Remedy Havingness. 

But why does he have to remedy havingness? Because he can’t create energy. 



There are obviously lots of methods one way or another which would get somebody out of 

creating energy. For example, after something had been discovered which the preclear was 

perfectly willing to have occupy the same space, the next thought was, “Well, let’s see now. If 

there’s that...that’s energy...I think I’ll...I’ll mock up a machine of some kind or another to 

remedy my havingness,” and mocked up a generator and then it went on to a power station and 

then on to suns. In other words the preclear went right on and remedied all of his considerations 

that he was dependent on anything else of any kind whatsoever for energy, and he started 

producing it himself. So that is the product of remedy of havingness. In other words, he would 

be saying that that is a very procedure if you just change the considerations on it all the way on 

up. This is obviously a finite procedure. You don’t go on remedying havingness forever. So 

why don’t you



 273 





remedy the condition that makes you remedy havingness? There is, then, an indicated process. 

This will turn on mockups and perception and everything else: “What wouldn’t you mind 

occupying the same space as you?” 



And so we have the Remedy of Havingness and Spotting Spots in Space.



 274



 CHAPTER TWENTY-THREE



 DESCRIPTION PROCESSING 



This happens to be the most important subject that you will cover in auditing. It may not be the 

most important subject in the universe, but it is the most important subject in auditing. This is a 

Step One, Two-Way Communication procedure. And this is the relatively advanced procedure 

of conducting a two-way communication, and someone who would have no concept of the four 

conditions of existence would not be remotely capable of running this process, therefore this 

would not come at the very early part of one’s study, although Step One itself comes early in 

training. 



This requires two-way communication - every iron you can throw into the fire. 



It requires all of your knowledge of Scientology and its theory and practice, to conduct an 

adequate two-way communication with the preclear, because if you do that you can, just by that 

and with no further process, resolve his case in a relatively short time. So this must be an 

extremely important process we are talking about here. It requires all of the knowingness you 

have of Scientology in order to do it. It is done by a clever auditor. It is not a process which is 

done by a fellow who, as his furthest effort of cognition toward the preclear, reads off a series of 

commands. It requires a continuous communication with the preclear -a two-way 

communication with the preclear. It requires that you establish it and that you maintain it and 

that you conduct it in such a fashion that the elements which



 275 



compose the preclear’s difficulty are vanished. Just by carrying on a two-way communication 

with the preclear, you can cause any difficulty he is having, such as non-exteriorization, such as 

a failure to take responsibility in other Dynamics, and so on, whatever his difficulties, you can 

conduct a two-way communication in such a way as to make those difficulties vanish. You will 

have just as much good fortune with this process as you are willing to be a clever auditor and to 

follow the exact rules of this. 



The primary difficulty with this process Two-Way Communication is that it apparently is 

entirely permissive, it apparently can wander into any field, topic, subject, address anything 

thereby an individual who is not cognizant of its very, very precise fundamentals would go 

immediately astray. He would go as far astray as men have gone far astray. It’s a process which 

you can easily get entangled about. It’s a process which you can be argued with about. 



A two-way communication could be a very broad field, but it has a particular precision area 

where you as an auditor can concentrate. If you know the exact mechanics of what you are 

doing, used cleverly, this becomes the best process you ever had. When you don’t know its 

mechanics, and you don’t use it cleverly, it becomes the gummiest, most misunderstood, non-

advancing sort of a process you ever ran into. So again here is a process that requires judgement 

yet is very easy to do. 



The part of Two-Way Communication we are taking up here could be given a name all of its 

own, and we would call it DESCRIPTION PROCESSING. It could be given this name, but it’s 





likely to get entirely lost if we always refer to it by this name. In the first place Description 

Processing would not be its entire



 276 



description name. It would have to be DESCRIPTION RIGHT NOW Processing. But we had 

better call it a process known as Two-Way Communication, which is just exactly what it is 

labelled under Step One of Intensive Procedure, (Intensive Procedure: The Standard Operating 

Procedure, 1954, given in The Creation of Human Ability by L. Ron Hubbard.) and this comes 

at this distance into this material because it uses every single thing that you know about 

Scientology. And the main thing that it uses is this factor: If you establish the As-is-ness of 

your preclear’s condition to his satisfaction it will vanish. And you don’t establish its As-isness by tracing its consequences, by tracing its basics, by tracing its significances, by 

discovering what lies under the thing that lies under the thing that lies under the back of beyond 

the other side of, or “Let’s change it all, change it all, change it all,” because what will happen? 

The process will persist won’t it? This is a tricky one, then. It is a process which actually and 

overtly processes and achieves Alter-is-ness, by using nothing but As-is-ness. You can get a 

change of case with the preclear very simply, solely by taking his case as it is right now. We 

want right now, no place else, we want to know how it is right now. 



The key question of this process can be codified. The process is not sloppy, it’s not all over the 

place, it is highly precise, and the key question is: 



How does it seem to you now? 



You could just go on asking this question. That is all you want the preclear to give you. How 

does it actually seem to him right now. If he tells you about the room, or a manifestation of 

some sort, or something he likes, or something he dislikes, or something he knows or doesn’t 

know - whatever it is - what you



 277 



want, and all that you want from the preclear about it in this process is how actually does it seem 

to him right now. 



And by doing exactly that, you get change, change, change in the preclear, at a very fast rate - by 

doing what? - by asking for nothing but an As-is-ness. What is the condition as it is right this 

instant. 



If you were a very, very clever auditor, all you would have to do is to take this basic question, 

How does it seem to you now, and couch it in a thousand different guises, always, always 

pointing straight at this one, that we want this individual to discuss exactly how it is. We want to 

know about it. And we don’t want any romance, we don’t want any embroidery, we don’t want 

any alteration so as to get our sympathy. We don’t want any super-pressure on us so that we 

will do something. All we want to know is how it is. That takes clever auditing. 



It’s quite a fascinating thing to watch a preclear come into cognition - not recognition, because 

he probably never knew it before (re-cognition would be “I knew it but I forgot it”). 

Conditions exist through him, around him, above him, below him - considerations exist of which 

he has no cognition. These have come into beingness without any understanding whatsoever on 

his part. He’s never seen them before and yet they’re right there, so what we’re interested in is 

cognition - looking at it - and we want the As-is-ness of any and every condition which this 

fellow has. 



The preclear begins to change very rapidly. The first thing you know he is saying, “Well, 

there’s nothing wrong with my throat!”...”The back of my head’s perfectly alive.” If he 

doesn’t know the formula of what you’re doing, and he doesn’t track with it at all, and he 

doesn’t know Scientology, you have ceased at 





 278 



that moment to be entirely human as far as he’s concerned. Now I have run this process on 

preclears who were intensely resistive to auditing, who knew nothing could happen, who 

generally finished up sessions saying nothing happened, and I received the most amazing sort 

of result. The person knew something had happened. Cognition had occurrred. And it had 

occurrred with considerable action. The person knew this extremely well, that something had 

happened. You can’t run this on anybody without changing his condition. It’s impossible to do 

so. Even if you ran it poorly you’d change his condition. 



Running this process you could do this occasionally. You could throw in where and when. Not 

often or repetitively. Once in a while. (Let’s not stick him back on the time track.) And 

recognize well that if he spots this thing even vaguely in the time and place where it began, you 

are likely to get a whole chain of things blowing, but we are not primarily interested in that, 

because where, and what, is present time. Time is not just beginningless and endless. It would 

seem so, but time is a continuing postulate. It is a postulate which continues to be postulated. All 

time is now. What we call the future, which is entirely hypothetical, is what will be, and that is 

not an As-is-ness. You could have an As-is-ness about the future, such as “I am worried about 

the future,” but you don’t actually have a future in that preclear. And as far as the past is 

concerned, it has no more actual validity than the future. All that exists of the past is what is in 

the present. And if it’s not in the present, so what? You could say, well, it might come into the 

present. No, it won’t. Not if you’ve got the present straightened out. If you have a preclear in a 

continuous state of beingness, in this



 279 



present, which is rising and getting better, and his cognition is better and better and better 

you’re turning on his knowingness. And if you turn on his knowingness in the present, his 

knowingness about the past will increase markedly. 



I’ve had a preclear start out with a statement like, “I am a body, I know I am a body and nothing 

but a body”, and tell me he has “heard things about Scientology and exteriorization” and so 

forth, and he recites all kinds of things he has picked up from the materialistic practitioners. 

Well, I read in a psychiatric text once upon a time (this is their knowingness level on this) that 

people occasionally had the delusion that they were not in their bodies, and that psychiatry used 

electric shock to move them back into their bodies. This would be more or less the level of 

practice of monkeys hanging from their tails - they really shouldn’t be fooling around with such 

things as the spirit. These practitioners sat in their chairs for fifty years and for, I’d say, several 

million if not several billion hours, and they didn’t notice this? Well they were starting out on 

the basic premise that man is mud is mud is mud, he’s a body, and there’s nothing you can do 

about it anyway - and going at it from this angle they were not likely to find out much of 

anything but the fact that there does happen to be some mud around. 



The As-is-ness of the preclear was what was in the road of all the materialistic approaches to the 

field of healing. This is not to imply that a medical doctor is out of order in practicing on broken 

bones, obstetrics and such things - in other words mechanical structure - but when it comes over 

to his doing something about the mind, he has to deal with the spirit, because there isn’t any 

mind. That was the thing they never learned



 280 



about. They didn’t find out that what they were studying didn’t exist. They were studying a 

lump of computing machine made out of neurons and cyclotrons or something of the sort. Well, 

they could have studied it forever and never found out anything about it, because it has no As-isness. They could go on describing it forever, and of course it would continue to persist because 

it is itself an Alter-is-ness. 





Well, don’t you make the same mistake with a preclear. Don’t go chasing after all the endless 

significances and symptoms - in other words, Alter-is-ness, Alter-is-ness, Alter-is-ness - don’t 

make the mistake of addressing this, because all you will do is perpetuate the condition. Just 

don’t make that mistake. What you want to do is quite something else. 



You want to find out how it seems right now. You don’t want any action on the part of this 

preclear who wants to go chasing after significances. He is so fixed on the idea of being an 

observer that let’s let him observe. So there’s a white area. He says, “Uh...I don’t know...the 

back of the leg’s kind of white and the front of the leg’s kind of dark. And there seems to be 

something shooting up through the leg.” “Well, how does it seem to you now?” Keep him 

looking at it, keep him looking at it now. You just want him to describe it and describe it and 

describe it. And then communicate and communicate and communicate and communicate, and 

we don’t care if we seem to waste some time with it. So he goes off into some wild excursion, 

something like, “Well, it seems to me like...I don’t know, I can’t quite look at the room when 

that pain is on. I try to look at the room. I wonder why that is. I wonder why that is. I’ve had a 

lot of speculation as to why this is.” You can let him talk for a while. It’s burning time, but 

remember you’re



 281 



preserving a two-way communication, and throughout this process you’re preserving a two-way 

communication, and that is its keynote and that is why it continues to work so easily. Your 

preclear does not seem to be under duress at any time. Believe me, is he interested in his 

conditions! And in Description Processing you simply use that overtly to get him to describe 

them as they are. 



But this requires a certain sensitivity on the part of an auditor. He’s got to know when the 

preclear starts weaving the fancy tales. 



How is he going to know this? The condition does not alter. That’s an interesting one, isn’t it? 

He’s describing how horrible it is. He goes on and describes this, and describes it and describes 

it and describes it for three or four minutes, and there’s no change at all. He describes it for a 

few more minutes and there’s no change at all. 



Don’t shoot him. 



You could ask him how his feet seem to him. Get him off that subject, because you hit a lying 

machine, and if you’ll just get his attention off of it, why, maybe you’ll get some straight 

answers. 



This is where you learn about people. But in what framework are you learning about people? 

You’re going entirely on the very, very basic material of the four conditions of existence. You 

will see a person run this cycle over and over and over as he does Description Processing. 

People become so fantastically patterned, they are so predictable when they start this sort of 

thing - and they become very easy to process. This is not restimulative, because you’re not 

trying to change the preclear. You’re trying to find out how he is. You can do this for hours. 

Cognitions will occurr, such as, that he’s actually had a migraine headache for



 282 



years and he didn’t even know it, except that all of a sudden it stopped. All of a sudden, he said, 

“Wait a minute. What’s happened to this pain? I didn’t ever know I had a pain here.” That sort 

of things happens in this type of processing. 



“Description Right Now” Processing - Two-way Communication: Step One. This is how you 

get them into communication, how you keep them in communication and why you keep them in 

communication along this particular line. You could perform this in 8-C Opening Procedure, but 

you’re simply maintaining a two-way communication. “How does this (part of the room) seem 





to you now?” You’re trying to get the exact condition at that moment which he is observing. 

You will get continuous change. You are undoing all the change he has put into the condition. 

But it undoes with great rapidity, so there is some hope after all.



 283



 CHAPTER TWENTY-FOUR



 GROUP PROCESSING 



There is a subject of considerable interest to us, which is quite a remarkable subject, and that is 

group auditing. There are a number of things to be known about this. 



A group auditor is one who stands in front of, sits in front of, or relays by loudspeaker system 

to a group (and a group consists of two or more people), auditing, so as to improve their 

condition of beingness as thetans. That is a full, complete definition of a group auditor. 



If he’s there to improve their condition, he will of course do his group auditing well. If he is 

simply standing there giving rote commands, he might do something too, because the mechanics 

of auditing will carry forward a great distance. But if he really wants to make people more 

cheerful, better, put them up into an operative band, change their condition, make the able more 

able, then he recognizes as he audits a group that he is auditing a number of preclears and he is 

auditing them collectively and individually all at one time, and a good group auditor recognizes 

that this is not unlike driving a twenty-mule team - it’s a trick. So, some people are good group 

auditors. They recognize what it takes to do it, they don’t flinch, and they can do it. And there 

are some who stand up at the front of a room and give auditing commands, but whom you’d 

hardly call group auditors. Now what are the conditions under which group auditing is best 

done: 



First, the atmosphere should be quiet. And the



 284 



methods of ingress into the group auditing room, such as doors, windows, chimneys, and 

skylights, should be to some degree policed so that we don’t get people walking into the 

session. And this would include, under a sub-heading, the fact that people don’t come late to a 

group auditing session. A group auditor who knows his business simply follows that as a rule. 

He doesn’t let people come late. They just don’t come. When they get there they will find the 

next group auditing session is next Thursday, which fact might be announced on the door. He 

impresses this upon his people and upon his group, that people mustn’t come stumbling in 

fifteen or twenty minutes after the group auditing starts, fall over a couple of chairs, fall over a 

couple of preclears, drop a couple of ashtrays, step on a couple of ashtrays, and then drop their 

pocketbook, upset the chair nudge the fellow in front of them so they can say “excuse me”, 

and, in other words, interrupt the session. That is because of the things that can happen by 

reason of that. You might have somebody sitting there in the back of the room where these 

people came in and sat down, who was just at that moment getting into something that was 

pretty darned hard to handle, and was having to wrestle it with himself. You were there helping 

him as a group auditor, true, and your next command would have a tendency to straighten this 

up, but this individual has started to flounder, and all of a sudden somebody comes in and helps 

him out by falling all over him. This introduces a randomity of unpredicted motion into the 

environment which is not conducive to that person’s case improvement. 



So the Group Auditor has a Code all of his own which happens to be the Auditor’s Code, but 

the Group Auditor’s Code has some more things to it. And



 285 



amongst those things is: People don’t ever come late to a Group Auditing Session. 





Just to give a few other little items on this Code -he doesn’t audit with processes which 

establish long comm lags. He avoids processes which do this on individual preclears. If he 

knows that a certain process produces a long communication lag on individual preclears here 

and there, he certainly avoids it in auditing a group. He audits primarily with techniques which 

will discover every person in the group alert at the end of an hour’s processing. And that 

certainly doesn’t include anything that will give somebody a twenty-two hours’ comm lag. 



Another part of his Code is: He must be willing to grant beingness to the Group. He isn’t a lion 

tamer sitting up there with a bunch of lions about to pounce on him. He is somebody who is 

standing up in front of a group willing to grant beingness to that group. And as he grants 

beingness to the group, so the group recovers. If he is willing to grant beingness to a group, a 

great many things immediately fall into line. And these things follow: He gives his commands in 

a clear, distinct voice, and if he notices that people in one part of the room or another look at him 

suddenly after he has given the command, or look at him questioningly, he simply repeats the 

command for the whole group. In other words his mission is to get that command through and 

registered. 



He recognizes and must recognize, that the people to whom he is talking in this group are not an 

audience. They are a number of people who are in a greater or lesser degree involved in 

recognizing looking at or resolving problems relating to their beingness, and as such, of course, 

are slightly out of communication with him. He must recognize this just as in an individual



 286 



session he has to give his commands clearly, distinctly and get them answered. In a group 

auditing session he doesn’t have the answer. He doesn’t get that answer that says, “Yes, I’ve 

got that.” Yes, I’ve finished that, and so forth. Therefore he must do all of his auditing on such 

a basis that it obviates those answers. You see, he gives a command, and he’s not going to get a 

reply from his preclear, and so he must therefore take enormous precautions, actually very 

exaggerated precautions, to make sure that every word he says is clearly registered to the most 

anaten (Anaten: an abbreviation of “analytical attenuation”, meaning a diminution or weakening 

of the analytical awareness of an individual for a brief or extensive period of time) person in the 

entire group. His words must register. He must also be careful to give his commands in such a 

way as not to give a number of failures to one or more individuals in the group. For instance he 

says, “Now get a place, get a place where you are not...Just contact that place.” And he 

shouldn’t give another, contradictory command until he’s sure that everybody in the group has 

found at least one location. Let’s take an example of that. He says, “Get a place where you are 

not.” And he waits for a moment, and several people in the group already have spotted this 

place with accuracy, and so he says “Get one place certainly, and then some more.” Now, what 

he has done is to take those five, six, eight people in the group who did not find that one place 

right now right away, and he let it be all right for them to go on and comm lag on it. And he still 

made it all right for the remainder of the group to go on and get other places. 



One does not need to have a stylized patter in order to do this, but that does happen to be a very 

stylized patter. “Get one place, one place for sure...and



 287 



when you’ve got that one place, get some more, and get some more places.” 



Now, if the auditor is willing to grant beingness to the group, he’ll be heard all the way through 

the group, and if he’s not willing to grant beingness to the group, he won’t be heard all the way 

through the group. 



Furthermore, if he’s not willing to grant beingness to the group, he’ll find himself, willy-nilly, 

shifting processes half way through. He suddenly decides he’d better run something else. He’d 

better run something tricky. He’d better run something that’s very stunty. We were doing all 





right, we were spotting the walls of the room, we were doing Group Opening Procedure which, 

given in the Group Auditor’s Handbook (Group Auditor’s Handbook: This was a 1954 

compilation of group auditing sessions resulting from the Advanced Clinical Courses of that 

year), is a very precise process. The auditor got that going fairly well, had just gotten that well 

started - and he decides - Well, let’s shift off to some...Ah! Duplication by Attention! All right. 

Look at the right wall, look at the left wall, look at the right wall, look at the left wall, look at the 

right wall, look at the left wall...uh...I don’t know, that doesn’t seem to be getting very far. Let’s 

see - what really should we do. And he switches to another process and another. 



The group by this time is getting sort of restless. What’s basically the trouble here? Is it the fact 

that the man doesn’t know what he’s doing? Well, it could be to some slight degree. But why 

doesn’t he know what he’s doing? Every single one of those commands and theory behind it 

can be found in the publications of Scientology. What’s he doing not knowing what he’s 

doing? Well I’ll tell you what he’s doing. He’s trying



 288 



not to grant beingness to that group. And there will be people in that group who are worried 

about granting beingness to the group and all these people getting bright and improving and 

becoming thetans and flying around and demoniacally attacking people and “You shouldn’t 

make everybody free like that, you know.” 



And these people will step on ashtrays, upset chairs, come late, get up in the middle of a group 

session and open and close windows, open and close doors, and then we discover, of course, 

that they don’t want to have beingness granted to them. But particularly, they are worried about 

the group session going on with this individual granting all that beingness to all these people 

and improving all these people, and if all these people improved, why, goodness knows what 

would happen - something horrible would happen, competition would get too high or something 

of the sort, or something dreadful would occurr. That’s the computation that it’s running on 

when bad auditing commands are used, and don’t ever think otherwise. No, don’t say, Well, he 

just doesn’t know. Every one of those homo sapiens, individualized the way he is to an Only-

One computation, has some facet of his beingness which is refusing to grant beingness. Every 

man alive has it to some degree, otherwise he’d never have a game or a contact. There’s always 

“the other side”. He isn’t going to grant any beingness to the Princeton football team - that 

sort of thing. And when you exaggerate this consistently and continually you’ll get somebody 

who doesn’t want to have any beingness granted to anybody anywhere, and so before he does 

some group auditing he won’t bother to read over the way you do it. And if he does he’ll do 

something else. And he won’t study up on his subject, he won’t look over his people, and he 

won’t audit in such a way as



 289 



to make them improve or win, and you will find, by the way, that his group session will not be 

well attended. A group auditor’s group session cannot be anything but well attended. They will 

be continually well attended, and they will increase in their attendance, to the degree that the 

individual is willing to grant beingness to people, in other words, do a good job. 



That’s the long and short of it, and that’s a very uncompromising statement, and one could say 

that there are a lot of things which mitigate this statement, but I’ll argue you out of them. The 

truth of the matter is that it comes down just to the granting of beingness. He will or he won’t. 



Now, can that be remedied with him? Yes, when he has a little more freedom. Just a standard 

auditing session as given in the Group Auditor’s Handbook will bring him up to a point where 

he will grant more beingness to people. It will do this. 



You could run this as a straight process, as a group session - just “grant some beingness to the 

front walls”, “some beingness to the back walls”. You could do this if you wanted to. But 

again this is putting too much significance into the process. 





The reason anyone is not granting beingness is that he himself is enchained and enslaved and he 

feels himself attacked to some degree by the environment, and you’ve got to get him up to the 

point where he has a little more operating margin in his own survival, and if he has a little 

survival margin he’s willing to let somebody else survive. He begins to treat survival as a 

commodity. There are only five quarts of it in the world, and he’s darned if anybody’s going to 

get any part of those five quarts, because he knows he needs it all himself. Right on this point 

you can tell immediately a good auditor and a bad one. So there



 290 



is a case computation at the bottom of group auditing ability. An individual who is afraid of 

effort is an accurate measure of this. People recognize instinctively, that a fear of effort, an 

unwillingness to put out effort, goes right along with “bad off”, “won’t grant beingness”, 

“got to slow other people down too”. So, do we have a group auditor who sits back and puts 

his feet on the desk and audits a group? Oh no, we don’t. The group won’t get better, won’t 

recover, won’t do anything. Why? They’ll sit there and run the commands because they’ve 

heard that Scientology is a good thing, but they will say, This guy doesn’t care. He isn’t 

interested. 



There is no necromancy involved here. We don’t have a beam of energy coming out from the 

group auditor settling like a little star over the head of every person. That is not the case in point. 

But there’s another case in point: 



There’s the simple matter of duplication of the communication. Why do people recognize this 

rather instinctively, that a person doesn’t care, if he hasn’t energy or effort. Well, here’s this 

individual. He seems to have some vitality. The communication line has as its Source Point 

VITALITY. And whatever there is at Effect point at the beginning, it will at least wind up at the 

end with vitality. If you’ve ever talked to somebody for a while in a rather bored tone of voice, 

you found them after a while getting bored. This is just “Q and A” (Q and A: From “Question 

and Answer”. This term originally referred to the fact that the answer to the question is the 

question. Q and A has been used as the term for “changing when the preclear changes”. It here 

refers to the preclear duplicating the beingness of the auditor). Have you ever listened to 

somebody who was very electrifying - a William



 291 



Jennings Bryan sort of a speaker - pound and howl and so forth - and when you look at an 

audience that’s been talked to this way - they’re aroused, they definitely are aroused. The man 

didn’t say anything logical at all at any time during the whole time he was talking, and yet just 

simply the fact that they are duplicating a speaker who seems to have some vitality comes on 

through to the audience and seems to give them some vitality. But does it give them some vitality 



-no, they are simply duplicating it. 

Now a group auditor could sit down, and talk to the group. As a matter of fact (this is a very 

dangerous thing to tell a group auditor) this actually brings about a little bit better duplication, 

because the group is sitting down. But if he is sitting down, think of how much now his voice 

has to do. He can’t depend on anything else to do anything for him. Everything he does must 

be contained in his voice. Everything he THINKS must be contained in his voice. Oh, you say, 

this then requires an actor. Yep. If you’re not willing to be various things, and if you can’t be 

various things at will, you actually haven’t even got any business auditing. Why? Because in 

that case you’re trying to keep things from being. And the first person you’re trying to keep 

from being is you. And if you’re trying to keep you from being, to any marked degree, you will, 

on a duplication basis, restimulate this fact on the other end of the line. You’ll keep others from 

being. So a group auditor could sit down. I don’t mean he should or must. 





As a matter of fact the best results I have ever gotten in group auditing sessions was actually 

walking up and down in front of a group and picking them out every now and then singly 

“Did you get that all right?” etc. And the group tone just starts going up,



 292 



and then the fact that they are doing drills which are just dynamite of course in themselves will 

just practically lift them right straight out of their heads. In one of the last broad group auditing 

sessions I did I came away from the mike and I was simply talking to the crowd and I was really 

trying to do something for their cases and so forth, and I was quite interested because it was 

getting on down toward the end of the series of group sessions. And I got the report afterwards: 

that there were more people exteriorized during that particular session than in any other single 

session I had given. Well, here I was feeling more alive, interested, urgent about what was going 

on and that in itself was communicating, and it was communicating very strongly. 



A group auditor who has no wish to have anything happen, however, will be disappointed if he 

sits there and reads the commands in a flat dull dead voice out of the Group Auditor’s 

Handbook, to a crowd of people. He will still get some results. This has been tested out. We 

took the worst group auditor you ever saw or ever heard of and gave him some commands that 

were not too well written and we sent him out to audit. His style was, “Well, I’ve got some 

commands here now...I’ve got some commands...let’s see now...uh...let’s see...hum...uh...look 

at the front of the room...it says here...lookattherightwall...” And this guy still got some results! 



So what we’re doing with just the processes themselves is fabulous. 



Something important to know about group auditing is this: If you’re afraid of a crowd, you 

won’t want to grant beingness to them, because that’s why you’re afraid of them. You’re sure 

that they’re about to interrupt you. You’re sure that they’re about to jump over



 293 



the seats and attack you. If you’re in that frame of mind toward a group, you will not be heard 

clearly through the group, you’ll have a tendency to change techniques, and your attention 

hunger will probably cause you to drop ashtrays, lose your place, and other wild things. 



Now let’s look at this thing called “stage fright”, and how a person could resolve it. One way 

he could resolve it is simply by some kind of creative processing. Just do mockups on being 

scared to death - body reacting, jumping, and so forth - but that’s a very crude way to handle 

stage fright. 



The best way to cure stage fright is to walk up on a stage before a vast number of people and do 

your best, and after you’ve done that a few times you recognize that this is an As-is-ness, this 

condition and generally everything connected with it, the strain and so forth, will blow. You just 

recognize clearly that you’re under strain when you talk to this audience. You’re just under 

strain and so what. “So I’m under strain when I talk to the audience” - and you won’t be. All it 

is is fear of what you will do, that you might do something unpredicted, or something strange 

might occurr, and after you’ve done this a few times you discover that no strange things occurr, 

that you get away with it every time. You survive, and you become quite accomplished. 



There’s something else that you could do to improve your capabilities as a group auditor. And 

that is beingnesses. If you could just practice beingness. You could be actors and be therapists 

and be swamis and be this kind of thing and be that kind of thing, and just work on it on kind of 

a gradient scale until you got the idea you could be anything. You could have this run on you, 

you see, in processing, and this would



 294 





handle stage fright too, because a person with stage fright is being somebody who has stage 

fright. That’s all there is to it. The answer to the problem is the exact problem. 



The whole subject of Group Auditing, then, involves itself today not so much with a knowledge 

of technique, but involves itself with a stage presence on the part of the group auditor and his 

command over the group itself. If he’s willing for the group to make gains, they’ll make gains. 

If he’s interested in giving them wins, they’ll have wins. If he’s interested in having a group, 

he’ll have one. It’s a very odd thing, but the best auditors have no difficulty in collecting 

groups. 



Now, you can’t have a feeling of embarrassment toward your fellow man actually and be able to 

walk up to him on the street and tell him anything or get him to do anything. As long as you 

have an embarrassment toward people you’ll have difficulty collecting a group or running a 

group or anything of this sort. Well, what is this quantity called embarrassment? It’s a matter of 

exhibition. 



Here we have appearance and disappearance as a dichotomy. And a group auditor is somebody 

who has to be willing to appear, and if one has been compulsively made to appear many, many 

times against his will - one of his mother’s favorite phrases might have been, “Look at you. 

Here you are dirty from head to foot and I just cleaned you up. Look at you! You’re appearing, 

you little swine!” -some gentle upbringing of this character will tend to promote 

embarrassment. But you shouldn’t go looking, for the answer to embarrassment, into deep-

seated significances. The embarrassment is that the fellow is there, kind of apologizing for his 

presence, and trying to disappear,



 295 



at the same time. That’s the As-is-ness of embarrassment. And that’s just an As-is-ness. We 

don’t care where it came from. He’s apologizing. So one of the first things you could do is 

simply not apologize for your presence. You might expect people to apologize for theirs but 

don’t you apologize for yours. You’re here, and their hard luck they’re there too or their good 

luck that they’re there. 



But if a fellow’s in really good shape, why this is the sort of an atmosphere that goes around a 

group session - this atmosphere says: “I’m here and you’re right there and I’m real glad to see 

ya and you’re sitting there and that’s awful unlucky for you if you’re sick because you’re 

going to get well anyway and you could come in and sit down and not run any of the commands 

at all and you’d still improve, naturally. That’s a matter of course. And I’m sorry you’ve got 

some things to be ashamed of, but you know, I haven’t got a single one” - that sort of an 

atmosphere. A fairly calm atmosphere rather than an excited, ecstatic atmosphere. But even an 

excited, ecstatic atmosphere or a swami atmosphere or an Amie Semple McPherson atmosphere 

is better than somebody standing there and saying, “You know I’m sorry I’m up here visible.” 



So the best way to get into the groove of group auditing is to get your case in good shape just 

exactly as you would get your case into good shape, just with standard processing - nothing 

peculiar, nothing slanted, nothing odd or unusual run on it, just get in good shape. You’re a little 

freer, and as you become freer then you are more competent to let yourself appear. 



And the other thing that goes right along with that and is not at all dependent on you getting 

your case in good shape, is the fact that you just go on making



 296 



public appearances and group auditing people with this postulate: Everybody’s glad to see me, 

they’re very happy to hear me talk, and I’m here and I know at the same time I’m scared to 

death and that’s the As-is-ness of it, so what, but I’m putting on a good show anyhow - and the 

next thing you know, why, all of that is gone, all that feeling of strain and tension is gone, and 

you’ll go on and give the group a session. 





But you give sessions to people to make them better, not to be somebody standing on a stage 

running off a set of words. You have reason, purpose and meaning in what you are doing and 

consider it a personal affront if somebody in this group did not immediately get totally 

improved after a couple of hours’ processing. That’s a personal affront, and you treat it as such 

when they tell you about it. “You mean you’ve come to one of my sessions and not gotten big 

gains? Humph!” and, “Well I’ll let you come to another session but don’t pull this again.”



 297



 CHAPTER TWENTY-FIVE



 SCIENTOLOGY AND LIVING 



The application of Scientology to one’s everyday life is a vast subject, and the best method of 

doing this is simply using the A-R-C triangle, with its consequent Chart of Human Evaluation, 

in everyday living. This takes into account most of the manifestations one sees and which one 

can evaluate quickly. 



This, of course, includes the Communication Formula, and an understanding of that 

Communication Formula would be an understanding of Cause, Distance, Effect, and the fact that 

people who are at the Cause point or Source point are very often very reluctant to be Cause, and 

people who are at the Effect point are very often very reluctant to be an Effect, in both cases of 

anything. 



So they will do various things in communication, such as to move out onto the distance between 

Cause point and Effect point, and so become a message. People get stuck very easily with this. 

You can carry all the wisdom you want, anywhere, to anybody, without yourself being a 

message. Have the message in your hand, put the message on the line, but don’t yourself be the 

message. People as they go between these two points get closer and closer to arrival, and there is 

the fellow who doesn’t dare arrive - he doesn’t dare get to that Effect point - and there’s the 

fellow who doesn’t dare leave, or go any further from that Cause point, and he’ll get further and 

further then from being Cause and he will be more and more an



 298 



Effect. And you could get these two points pulled together more and more tightly until, although 

they were not quite the same point, nevertheless you get this series of manifestations. 



An understanding of the Communication Formula is very useful in every day life, very useful in 

understanding life. You’ll see somebody who - everything he’s the cause of he becomes the 

effect of. This goes back a long way down the track. “The Second Law of Magic”, it could 

have been said to be, which is: Don’t be the effect of your own cause. Well, of course it’s 

impossible not to be the effect of your own cause, so that in itself is a booby trap. A fellow’s a 

fool if he thinks he can cause something without becoming one way or the other the effect of it. 

He can cause anything he pleases as long as he is willing to be the effect of what he causes. You 

are a static, you are a personality, you don’t have mass, meaning or mobility as yourself (you’re 

using a body rather than being a body) and you naturally are capable of causing almost 

anything - but supposing you were standing there protecting a body, being a body, hiding in a 

body, and you cause something which you wouldn’t like to have happen to the body. 

Supposing you pick up a book and throw it at somebody and give them a big bruise in the face 

or something of the sort - you don’t like the effect, so you begin to resist being an effect, and 

you resist being an effect more and more and more. Actually you’re making one body resist 

being an effect, and after a while, because of the make-up of this universe, where eventually 

(Anything you resist you get, Anything you resist you become - the favorite motto of this 

universe), you become it. In the absence of processing and understanding - let’s modify that to 

that degree - if you understand this and if there is processing, 





 299 



that ceases to occurr. But here we have people becoming very, very unwilling to be the cause of 

anything. You’ll find they won’t give anyone orders because they themselves do not want to be 

the effect of receiving orders. They’ll do all sorts of very remarkable things to avoid upsetting 

people in their vicinity. Why? Because they’re afraid themselves of being upset. They’ve 

learned by experience the overt act-motivator sequence (Overt act-motivator sequence: the 

sequence wherein someone who has committed a harmful or contra-survival act has to claim the 

existence of “motivators”, which are then likely to be used to justify committing further overt 

acts). If you want to know why people get nervous, it’s just because when they make the faintest 

overt act, they get this tremendously exaggerated package of facsimiles saying, No, no, no, no. 

“Oh, no, you’d better not talk to those people hard like that or it’ll really cave in on you.” Well, 

that is fairly normal in a society. It’s one thing to be polite because you can be polite, and it’s 

quite another thing to let yourself be walked all over, and it’s still quite another thing to be 

reactively in apathy. 



There is another manifestation which is even more curious, which you will see once in a while, 

and that is: anything that happens in the vicinity at all, the person knows he is the cause of it. 

Now it starts with anything that happened to him he knew he basically caused it, which of 

course happens to be a salient truth. It is true that anything that happened to him he was 

basically the cause of, but that’s way up scale on the chart, and now he just feels this reactively 

that he has become an effect, therefore he caused it. Just automatically. You’ve got Cause and 

Effect here so close together that they short circuit. If there is an effect, he caused it, and that 

spreads out to the broad environment,



 300 



until you will find an insane person, worrying like mad - for having caused all of World War II. 

He must have done something, because there was World War II. It must have been him. He’s 

playing the Only One very hard at this point. Even children will react on this one occasionally. 

On the death of an ally (Ally: a person who sympathized with or appeared to aid the survival of 

an individual when he was ill, injured or unconscious and whom the individual now reactively 

regards as necessary to his continued existence and well being) we see a child walking around 

worrying, and wondering what on earth he did that killed his grandmother or his sister or 

whoever. He must have done something. He was the effect of it, wasn’t he? He must have done 

something. 



And we get that as the entering wedge into superstition. “Let’s see, I’m a victim, therefore I 

must be guilty of something” - and they dream up something on the order of “original sin”. 

It’s all bad, therefore you must be the effect of it, and that becomes “repent, repent”. Well, 

actually, an individual only needs to accept the responsibility for his own acts, this will take care 

of things very nicely, and if he recognizes clearly the effects which he does cause, and if he’s 

perfectly willing to cause effects which he dares be the effect of himself, he can walk through 

this bramble and brush with great ease even as a body. There is a mode of conduct which is 

available. 



Well, I want to call your attention to the Chart of Human Evaluation, which was organized very 

early in 1951, which has various columns, and which gives behavior characteristics. It is plotted 

out mathematically on the basis of ARC. When you raise the affinity of a person you will raise 

his reality and raise his communication. When you raise his communication



 301 



you will raise his affinity and raise his reality. When you raise his reality of something you will 

raise his affinity and raise his communication. That is a very good chart to use in order to 

predict people. It is particularly important for an auditor to use this chart, but it is a chart that can 

be used in everyday living. 





An auditor at one time had studied this chart as just theory on a course. He found it quite 

interesting And having studied all this, why, it never occurrred to him that it was true or real or 

anything like that. He was perfectly in agreement with it as a mathematical study. 



Then one day the thought struck him, that this might be applicable to life at large. What if this 

chart were true! Of course, people really wouldn’t act like that. But he went into a bank and 

looked around, just watching people go by in the bank lobby, and watching the people behind 

the desks, and he talked to a couple of people and so on, and he started placing them on the 

Tone Scale. Well, he did this all one morning, and he came back to class pretty horrified. This 

Chart was absolutely accurate! It applied to every one of those people out there right across the 

columns. But what horrified him wasn’t the Chart but the fact that people consistently obeyed 

these levels all the time, didn’t know they were doing it or what they were doing and had no 

slightest inkling of what was going on. One fellow was “1.5-ing” (1.5: numerical equivalent on 

the Chart of Human Evaluation for the person who is in Overt Hostility. Anger is his standard 

state. He is capable of taking destructive action and is characteristically trying to stop things). 

He was acting exactly as a 1.5 should act, reacting across the boards. This auditor went so far, 

toward the end of morning, as to ask the fellow who was 1.5-ing just casually how his



 302 



arthritis was, and the fellow said, “Oh! It’s terrible!” Arthritis would be a way of stopping 

something, wouldn’t it? An auditor spots these things just in everyday fashion as casually as 

he’d pick up a blotter. 



But this auditor had all of a sudden walked into a completely predictable world./ That is good, 

but you want to beware of this trap: Let’s just avoid “the reason why”. The reason why they’re 

doing what they are doing is ARC, and the reasons they give are the reasons which justify them 

against the social pattern in which they live. That is the totality of “the reason why.” For 

instance, the cop acts the way he acts because he is a cop. The bank president has to act the way 

he acts because he is a bank president. His first excuse is his beingness or position and his next 

few excuses down the line might have been causative things in his life - it’s true that a person 

put in a position that requires for instance, a 2.0 (antagonism) is likely to at least dramatize 

being a 2.0 right across the Chart, but this is the curious thing: that he doesn’t have to believe it, 

too. You see, he could be a 2.0 straight across the Tone Scale but he doesn’t have to believe it. 

It’s only when he becomes all this seriously that he gets onto this scale. Remember that it’s 

ARC, then, not reasons why. If you fall into reasons why, you can just figure-figure with the 

rest of them forever. 



Just look at this ratio: how much space does the person have on that Communication Formula? 

How much space has he got? What’s his general affinity toward life at large? What’s his 

reality? What is he basically in agreement with? And we look at that, and actually we see these 

three corners of the triangle forming a plane, and as his space gets greater he goes right on up 

the scale and right on out the top of the scale, and as his space gets less, why the Source



 303 



Point and Receipt Point of the Communication Formula come almost together, but it’s like 

walking half way to Chicago. Every time you walked half way to Chicago you of course never 

got to Chicago. The Source Point and Receipt Point do not ever coincide. They will and can 

coincide perfectly at the top of the scale, at which moment you’ve achieved a condition which 

might be rather poetically stated as a brotherhood with the entire universe, but that’s a total 

affinity, and it is not an enforced or impelled affinity. Affinity which is compelled and enforced 

does not persist, it simply goes down scale. A free affinity for all of life is quite a different 

thing. 



Now every once in a while an individual may start worrying about his sympathy for life. He 

realizes that he has some inkling of what ants think about and do. And he knows that a cactus 





has a certain emotion about it too, and he’s likely to start worrying about this and try to pull 

back. He’s afraid he will become these things fixedly, if he goes into sympathy with them all. 



But his passport to freedom is his sympathy for all life and its forms. Not compulsive, just his 

free sympathy. If he were being forced to feel sympathetic towards young boys, we would be 

certain he would eventually, if he were a thetan, become a young boy. 



We recognize in this chart that we have a successful method of prediction, and in ARC in 

general we have a good scale of prediction, and an individual cognizant of these things can 

predict the activity of those about him. 



In view of the fact that these three items, A, R and C, combined together, are symptomatic of 

understanding, the degree of understanding which a person has of existence is the degree that he 

has distance



 304 



possible in his Communication Formula, therefore we find understanding of existence 

increasing and increasing and increasing as he goes upscale and decreasing, decreasing, 

decreasing as he goes downscale. Of course we could add every factor of Scientology into this, 

but let’s add beingness into this, and we find out that an individual is at first, on middle scale, 

completely free to be anything, and then as he goes downscale, he’s more and more 

compulsively being made to be something and he finds himself something, and this makes him 

unhappy because he feels that it is not by his own choice. We actually know by As-is-ness and 

the necessity of altering As-is-ness that he had to appoint an other-determinism to keep 

something, and this makes him unhappy because he feels that it is not by his own choice. We 

actually know by As-is-ness and the necessity of altering As-is-ness that he had to appoint 

another determinism to keep something to go on persisting, and he’s more and more avoiding 

motionlessness, because motionlessness is dangerous to him. Therefore a consistent, continual 

beingness as something is something he begins to fear, and when an individual is to a point 

where he has the horrible feeling that if he stood still for a long time in one place, he’d sort of 

grow roots, or he’d do something peculiar like this, something bad would happen to him. Or if 

pain turns on because he has to stand still for a while, you would have a condition there where 

you have compulsive beingness jibing with this one, which is the same thing -fear of 

motionlessness - and that fear of motionlessness is making him more and more motionlessness. 

The more frantically this individual goes into motion, the more he becomes a symbol. And, of 

course, the more he becomes a symbol, the more mass he accumulates, and the more meaning he 

accumulates.



 305 



And when you get him down around about .5 (apathy) on that tone scale his “reasons why” 

would be utterly nonsequitur, but boy would they be significant! Mass, meaning and mobility, 

then, fits in there. Beingness fits in there. To understand life and human beings at large one 

should recognize this - that every human being there is, is a thetan being a human being. 



An individual would never have become selectively and enforcibly a human being if he had no 

overt acts against human bodies. He has enormous numbers of overt acts against human bodies 



-and as a result he is very, very pressed on the subject of protecting bodies. He mustn’t let a 

body be an effect of anything. He now must protect the body from such things as himself. As 

he goes down tone scale, whereas he may worship some powerful spirit that throws lightening 

bolts at him, as far as individual thetans are concerned, to let anyone be three feet back of his 

head or something like that, is intolerable to him and means that a body is likely to be attacked. 

You see? “Thetans attack bodies.” He knows. They’re bad. On the subject of exteriorization 

this person will pull a trick like this: “Be three feet back of your head.” “Are you three feet 

back of your head?” “Well, you’re sure you are, now?” et cetera. And he’ll say right at that 

moment: “Well, put your attention on your nose. Make your nose move down a little bit”...and 



the person is sitting there saying “Whaaat?” A sudden change of pace. And it’ll just hang the 

preclear in that particular moment in time. We get that kind of a manifestation. 



Then there is the subject of something-or-nothing-ness. A thetan is perfectly at liberty to have 

all the somethingnesses he wants to and any of the nothingnesses he wants to. He can 

communicate with somethingnesses with great ease. A thetan is something



 306 



which is above something-and-nothing. A thetan isn’t just nothing, you see. He is something 

which can monitor somethingnesses and nothingnesses. Well, if this is the case then we find 

that people would be doing one of two things when they get extremely down scale. They would 

either be trying to concentrate on all somethings, or they would start concentrating on all 

nothings. As a matter of fact as they go down scale they do this alternately. They fall out of all 

something, something, something, and they go into a strata where it must be nothing, nothing, 

nothing, must be something, something, something, and then MUST be nothing, and then 

MUST be something, and going on down through these strata you’ll find human beings around 

who are utterly compelled to make nothing out of bodies, to make nothing out of cars, 

manuscripts, any remark which you make, any action. They’ve got to make nothing out of it. It 

would just kill them if they couldn’t ridicule it. Ridicule is the very lightest method of slapping 

you to pieces. You’ll come up with a favorite joke of yours and it’s always been funny to other 

people around, and all of a sudden this person takes it apart with a snide remark. And you have 

just won the track meet and boy you’re sure happy. You’ve got a ribbon about a yard long and 

you’re proud of it, and everything’s fine. This person says to you, “Do you know your shoes 

are muddy, and you have some dirt on your face, too.” NOTHING. Make nothing there if we 

possibly can. Well, this is the biggest allowable nothing they can make, and they’re being 

prevented from making nothing of things. They don’t know any mechanisms to use to unmock 

things. Really it’s by effort - energy. They’ve got to make nothing out of things with energy. 

The harder they try that the further down they go. Now, when they’ve got to make



 307 



something, because they have to have something, they’ll get into the same kind of situation. A 

thetan who is in very good shape could mock up a solid steel pyramid, and if he was in 

wonderful shape, you could probably see it too. But downscale, he just compulsively has to 

mock up something, then all of his automaticity is gone into making something and he’s 

objecting to it. He’s objecting to every part of it as he goes down. To understand people, then, 

we would have to understand what kind of cycle this person is on. Is he on a somethingness 

cycle or a nothingness cycle? Neither one is any worse than the other, but the truth of the matter 

is that sane people - and we categorize that just overtly as above 2.0 on the tone scale - sane 

people make somethings and nothings at will. They don’t have to. They do it to get some action, 

life, and so forth. And they can change their minds. They’re not compulsively making 

somethings and compulsively making nothings, continually. Their conduct has a little randomity 

and difference to it. 



There is not really such a condition as “insanity”. There really is no such condition as 

neurosis. These are simply two arbitrary words that were thrown into the society and they were 

never defined, and the society so variously understands them, that kids just as sane as anybody 

stand there calling each other crazy. It’s just a slang. There is an emotion, however, called the 

“Glee of Insanity” (“Glee of Insanity”: Also called the “glee of irresponsibility”. 

Manifestation which takes the form of an actual wave emanation resulting basically from an 

individual dramatizing the condition of “Must Reach - Can’t Reach, Must Withdraw - Can’t 

Withdraw”), which is an intolerable thing for a person. 



We could say a person in such a state in relationship to energy that he could not take care of 

himself,



 308 





couldn’t feed himself properly or take care of his body, we could call that person insane. But 

again this is just an arbitrary thing. It really has no definition in this society. 



But to understand and predict people at large it is only necessary for you to know whether they 

make something or nothing out of things, and then remember if you please that their conduct is 

consistent. They might have a lot of reasons why. They might be doing something 

unpredictable. But they have a motive which underlies their conduct just to this degree: 

something, or nothing. They are doing one or the other. 



Now there are two other categories of human beings, and one is the category up scale where 

things can be bad, good at will. The categories from Know to Sex on the upper scale can be 

good, but when they’re low on the scale, everything from Know to Sex - and low scale this is all 

Mystery - is BAD. And when you get someone where everything on the Know to Mystery 

Scale is bad, you have a case which is very inverted. It’s well below 2. It’s all bad. That’s why 

“we’ve got to make nothing.” This is your 1.5. He is actually operating there one hundred 

percent. He can only operate on emergencies. “We are about to have this tremendous disaster 

and therefore we are going to have to have this emergency legislation,” and therefore, “We can 

make this huge army,” so as to make nothing. 



They have lost the concept of doing something be cause it’s fun, and there’s your last keynote. 

Individuals who can do things, no matter whether good, bad or indifferent or outrageous, simply 

because they’re fun. An individual who can freely and with a clear heart do things because 

they’re fun is a very sane person. He’s in good shape. 



You can notice the amount of laughter which a



 309 



person laughs. Laughter has a number of harmonics down the line, but we’re not talking about 

the harmonics. This is rather upper scale laughter. He doesn’t laugh because he’s embarrassed. 

He laughs because he thinks something is funny, and if a person laughs fairly often and is very 

easy in that laughter you’ve got a sane man. Down scale they laugh less and less and less, or 

laugh more embarrassedly, or compulsively or obsessively, more and more and more, as we get 

way down to the bottom, and the person there just doesn’t laugh. He doesn’t live, either. He just 

lies there - mass, meaning and no mobility. He’s not even a symbol any more. 



There in essence if you care to study it, is the Chart of Human Evaluation, and if you care to 

apply this information to life as a whole you’ll find out that you can know human beings. 



But remember you shouldn’t expect them to know you. If their distance in that communication 

formula is very close together, they won’t understand you, but that doesn’t prevent you from 

understanding them.