From squirrel@echelon.alias.net Wed Mar 17 19:30:02 1999
Path: newscene.newscene.com!novia!sunqbc.risq.qc.ca!peerfeed.ncal.verio.net!news.he.net!news.lava.net!anon.lcs.mit.edu!nym.alias.net!mail2news-x2!mail2news
Date: 18 Mar 1999 02:30:02 -0000
Subject: FZ BIBLE 10/35 SOLUTION TO ENTRAPMENT 9TH ACC
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,alt.clearing.technology
From: Secret Squirrel <squirrel@echelon.alias.net>
Comments: Please report problems with this automated remailing service to
	<squirrel-admin@echelon.alias.net>. The message sender's identity
	is unknown, unlogged, and not replyable.
Message-ID: <afc06eac6d4409135359f1d2422939d3@anonymous.poster>
Mail-To-News-Contact: postmaster@nym.alias.net
Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net
Lines: 1097
Xref: newscene.newscene.com alt.religion.scientology:690538 alt.clearing.technology:76284

FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST

9th ACC - THE SOLUTION TO ENTRAPMENT CASSETTES 10/35

Our purpose is to promote religious freedom and the Scientology
Religion by spreading the Scientology Tech across the internet.

The Cof$ abusively suppresses the practice and use of
Scientology Tech by FreeZone Scientologists.  It misuses the
copyright laws as part of its suppression of religious freedom.

The writings of LRH form our Old Testament just as the writings
of Judiasm form the Old Testament of Christianity.

We might not be good and obedient Scientologists according
to the definitions of the Cof$ whom we are in protest against.

But the Christians are not good and obedient Jews and yet
are allowed to have their old testament regardless of any
Jewish opinion.

We ask for the same rights, namely to practice our religion
as we see fit and to have access to our holy scriptures
without fear of the Cof$ copyright terrorists.

We ask for others to help in our fight.  Even if you do
not believe in Scientology or the Scientology Tech, we hope
that you do believe in religious freedom and will choose
to aid us for that reason.

Thank You,

The FZ Bible Association

**************************************************


9TH ACC CONTENTS

December 1954 to January 1955 in Phoenix, Arizona.

Based on the solution to entrappment cassette version.

F# = File number (** = not available)
O# = Original Number (according to the master list posted by Pilot)
REN = As renumbered in the Solution to Entrappment cassettes

F# O#  REN  DATE  TITLE

01  1   1  Dec  6 Introduction to 9th ACC: Havingness
02  2   2  Dec  7 The Essence of Auditing, Know to Mystery Scale
03  3   3  Dec  8 Rundown on Six Basics
04  4   4  Dec  9 Communication Formula
05  5   5  Dec 10 The Practice of Dianetics and Scientology
06  6   6  Dec 13 Conduct of the Auditor
07  7   7  Dec 14 Mechanics of Communication
08  8   8  Dec 15 Havingness
09  9   9  Dec 16 Pan-determinism and One-way Flows
10  9A 10  Dec 17 Hist. & Dev. of Processes: Games & Limitations in Games
11  9B 10A Dec 17 History and Development of Processes: Q&A Period
12 10  11  Dec 20 Games (Fighting)
13 11  12  Dec 21 Anatomy of Games -- Part I
14 11A 12A Dec 21 Anatomy of Games -- Part II
15 12  13  Dec 22 One-way Flows in Processing
16 12A 13A Dec 22 One-way Flows in Processing: Question and Answer Period
17 13  14  Dec 23 Havingness and Communication Formulas
** 13A --  Dec 23 After Lecture Comments   
18 14  15  Dec 24 Pan-determinism
19 14A 15A Dec 24 Pan-determinism: Question and Answer Period
20 15  16  Dec 27 Training New People
** 15A --  Dec 27 Curiosa from Dianetics 55!
21 16  17  Jan  3 Auditing Requirements, Differences
22 16A 18  Jan  4 Time
** 16AA -  Jan  4 Q&A Period
23 17  19  Jan  5 Auditing at Optimum
24 18  20  Jan  6 Exteriorization
25 19  21  Jan  7 Elementary Material: Know to Mystery Scale
26 20  22  Jan 10 Education: Goals in Society -- Adult Education
27 21  23  Jan 11 Fundamentals of Auditing
** 21A --  Jan 11 Auditors' Conference
28 22  24  Jan 12 Definitions: Glossary of Terms -- Part I
29 23  25  Jan 13 Definitions: Glossary of Terms -- Part II
30 24  26  Jan 14 Definitions: Glossary of Terms -- Part III
31 25  27  Jan 17 Auditing Demonstration: Six Basics in Action
** 25A --  Jan 17 Auditors' Conference
32 26  28  Jan 18 Auditing Demonstration: Spotting Spots
** 26A --  Jan 18 Auditors' Conference
33 27  29  Jan 19 Auditing Demonstration: Exteriorization
34 28  30  Jan 20 Background Music to Living
35 29  31  Jan 21 Axioms: Laws of Consideration -- What an Axiom Is

Note that 6 of the 9 discussion periods (Q&A periods, Auditors'
Conferences, etc.) were omitted from the cassettes, leaving us
with only 35 files instead of the 41 that were recorded.  It is
also possible that material was edited out of the lectures which
are available.  If anyone has a set of the original reels, please
post any missing material.

========================

9ACC file 10/35

9th ACC #9A (renumbered 10)  - HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF PROCESSES: 
GAMES AND THE LIMITATIONS IN GAMES


Transcript of taped lecture by L. Ron Hubbard 9ACC9A    -  
 5412C17 (Renumbered 10 in " The Solution To
Entrapment"cassettes) 10th of 35 talks to students on the
9th Advanced Clinical Course in Phoenix, Arizona between
December 6, 1954 and January 21, 1955

HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF PROCESSES: GAMES AND THE
LIMITATIONS IN GAMES

A lecture given on 17 December 1954


Okay. I want to cover with you today a summation of
processes, rather designed to give you a history of
processing - developments that work.

Now, to go into a processing session here of one hour on
processes and cover every process developed in Dianetics
and Scientology would be a very interesting feat, very
interesting feat. Because, as I have said before, and this
has been substantiated, and didn't say it originally, more
phenomena and more methods of handling phenomena have been
developed in Dianetics and Scientology research in any one
month than has developed - been developed in the history of
psychology, which is almost a hundred years.

Now, there's a little bit of speedup here. And I'll tell
you why that took place. You could - I'd have to really
show you old cuffs to give you a complete idea of this.
There are more tricks and things about the mind than one
could easily count in a very, very long summer. Just count.
But nearly all of these tricks are simply complications
resulting from a certain series of decisions - denominators,
you might say - decisions on the part of a thetan to have a
game. And he has made an awful lot of decisions which he
holds in common with everybody else.

In processing these - one finds himself up against the
ingenuity of the thetan. And he is very ingenious. Actually
he is as in - an - as an - in - ingenious today as he ever was.
That's a hard thing for an auditor to entirely grasp
sometimes. He sees his preclear completely unchanging,
completely set, bogged in and black and just having quite a
time for himself; and yet this preclear bogged down and all
black and no space and so forth, yet has an ability to
occlude all ability.

And when you recognize that this is a trick, this is an
enormous feat to be able to occlude, hide and suppress the
enormous ability of the thetan. You recognize that he's
just as able as he ever was in the standpoint of making
postulates. The only difference is he's decided to make
them in the opposite direction. And he doesn't please us
too well because it reminds us of the racehorse that
starts out at the starting gate, goes around at the
starting gate and runs the race backwards. That's about
what this fellow is trying to do. But as far as being able
to make up his mind suddenly is concerned, he is still as
able as he ever was. Persuading him to make up his mind in
a positive direction is quite another thing. He decides
that if he turned on any visio, that the small amount of
game which he has left would go glimmering. So you show him
that he still has visio and off it goes; you show him he
still has sonic and off it goes: He is trying to hold on to
as much game as he has which in his opinion isn't much. And
he does this by making a game out of his - out of his
disabilities.

All games have to some degree, a disability connected with
them. Someone who goes to the Olympics, gets into an
interesting state of affairs, he is trying to perform
various physical feats under tremendous limitations. And if
he didn't introduce enough limitations, the Olympic Games
Commission, of course, would - or whatever you call it - would
introduce some more. For instance, they have ten events
that have to take place in forty-eight hours; that's been
going on for a couple of thousand years. And, this, of
course, takes all the top-level athletes and just knocks
them flat. Naturally, any one of them could have - could
break, perhaps, the world record if permitted, you know, a
rest and a breather and so forth, but they have to do all
this consecutively in about two days, you know,
bang-bang-bang-bang! And naturally at the end of that time
they carry them out in stretchers. But there is imposition
of a limitation.

Now it's a weird thing that a set of games which are
evidently designed to show man that he is powerful and does
have strength and can serve as a private soldier in a Greek
phalanx, evidently something like this you would say would
have more freedom connected with it. No, if they get any
freedom at all, they will alter that freedom. If anyone
starts to knock too many home runs in baseball, they change
the ball. They did that on Babe Ruth, by the way. The
baseball they have today is nowhere near as springy or as
resilient as it was when Babe Ruth was knocking out home
runs. They put another limitation on the game as soon as
they find out that winning is too easy. This is a curious
thing.

And we find our black five doing it just as easily as the
Olympic Games Commission or the "Council of Baseball Rules
of How We're Going to Fix Them Up Now." We find these
people all doing more or less the same thing. They scent
the fact that there may be an easy win in progress and so
they grab another limitation and shove it into place.

Now, their imagination is what is at fault. Their
imagination is grievously at fault, very much so. Because
they cannot envision a game which has more motion in it
than the game they are now playing. Anyone becomes very
afraid at any additional motion to a game. They get it on
this basis: They feel that the consequences of the game are
necessarily as great as the motion which takes place in the
game. The consequences of the game must be as great as the
amount of motion in the game - a little law that they dream
up, see. In other words, the number of consequences must
match the number of possibilities of wins to get a balanced
game and to keep people from winning or losing. Both wins
and loses end a game, and a person becomes ahxious about
games being ended and they, therefore, will impose as many
consequences as there are potentialities for win. And your
black five is playing the game all by himself and he knows
there are no other opponents and he knows there's nobody to
play a game with. He recognizes this clearly. But actually
this is a recognition he might as well have had in his
first hour in this universe as now - that he hasn't any
actual opponents. And he has turned off his ability to
recognize opponents. This is one of the consequences he has
added to himself

So if we look over this balance whereby the individual
feels that there may - must be as many consequences as there
are wins, as many consequences as there are potential
motion - if we look this over we recognize that people are
trying to hold a balance. And in trying to hold this
balance, any advance toward more wins being countered by
more consequences keeps actually, multiplying the
consequences. And so we have very complicated games. And
any one of these innumerable games, such as "I will be an
anthropologist and guess about the past instead of simply
remembering how I did make a stone axe." The - the game of "I
am going to sit here and get this information if it kills
me," you see; this sort of a game and so forth, whereas one
knows the information. Well, now, how do we - how do we work
this so that it does come up scale and more motion can be
added to a game? Well, the basic thing would be of course,
to create again in the individual a sufficiency of
imagination. That would be the first and foremost requisite
here. But how would we go about doing that?

Well, if we are fighting this scarcity of games, then
inventing games would be far more important. But we
discover something quite interesting. We look at two-way
communication and we discover in two-way communication
that originated communication is the greatest scarcity
there is. And somebody originates a communication and it
falls into the lap of all the disabilities of the thetan
and the next thing you know, why, he's a very unhappy man
because somebody has invented another game. So that he,
perforce, is trying to slow down this invention of games.

The one way to have no-game - everyone recognizes this with
great clarity - is simply to keep on inventing games at such
a rapidity that no one can keep up with them. People have
accused me of this and have completely missed on this one,
that actually I was playing the same game I started to
play. I have not been playing any different game or
dreaming up a different game. This game was started a long
time ago and is still going forward. They get stuck in the
particularities of phenomena and so on. All right. And I
don't! Phenomena I have learned is easy to come by.

Now, here we have this tremendous number of complexities.
Now, if you recognize that a thetan has no mass, meaning or
mobility and that all these things have to be invented by
him, if we recognize that this is the case, then we get
into one of the more interesting phases. We recognize then
that every complication is a via on a communication line.
Cause, distance, effect, with the rest of the horseshoe in
the answer and the acknowledgment, and then cause,
distance, effect with the answer and the acknowledgment on
the other side of the horseshoe; this is all very
well - two-way communication - but we have, sitting in the
middle of all this, the idea that an individual who goes
into thorough and complete communication blows all his
games, just like that! So, we have cause, via, effect, and
that is the communication formula of nearly everyone alive
today: cause, via, effect. Got the idea?

Well, now, the a - if the preclear's formula for
communication is cause, via, effect, answer, via,
acknowledgment - pardon me, cause, via, effect, via, answer,
via, acknowledgment, that's - that's his formula for
communication - without the second horseshoe! We can
understand that he is trying to keep from a full and
complete, wide-open communication in all directions. We
discover that this is his - this is his baby.

Now, the second that we start to open up his communication
lines, we start to run into these enormous numbers - this
enormous number of vias. And each one of these vias at some
time or another now or then, has been a game. You see that?
The way you make a game is actually, the best formula in
the world is to misfire somewhere on the communication
formula. And you've got a game immediately.

All right. Now, if we have - if we have each one of these
vias for seventy-four, seventy-six trillion years - it adds
up for some people seventy-four, some people with
seventy-six-trillion years of physical universe - if we - if we
have this accumulation of vias we can see very well that he
was probably inventing a new one at least every day
in - early on the track. You see? And latterly has been much
less inventive and has simply been coasting along and only
inventing a new one once every month or two.

Like, you'll find out, if you plot your preclear, that
only a few weeks ago he made some sort of counter-postulate
to himself: "Everything I seem to do is, you know,
backwards; I say I'm going to do one thing, it's something
else" or - . You'll find he's said something like this to
himself He's just decided on a new via and then not letting
himself in on it, you see. And we get the - the idea here of
these - this total communication lag of seventy-four,
seventy-six trillion years, you see, where always - got some
new vias introduced in there someplace or another which
makes just more and more lag.

Now, if we were to discover the basic communication of the
physical universe and find the primary via, you see, why
we'd start to blow this whole thing. Well, actually we did
with "survive." And it starts to blow this whole sequence
of vias. The dynamic principle of existence is survive. The
one thing you cannot prove is that you will survive
forever. Think it over for a moment. How would you prove
that? You'd survive forever, wouldn't you? See, it's an
unprovable, unendable game. The primary via is, is wait and
see - what? Whether or not you survive forever, of course!

Well, eventually you just get tired of that game a little
bit so you start proving that you didn't survive and so
forth; but it's sitting on the basic postulate that you
are going to. And you haven't changed your first postulate
when you put in the second postulate and you get an
interesting set of stuff In the printed edition of The
Creation of Human Ability, the Axioms and so forth that
demonstrate this, go along with it, are all there. You can
study them. But what we're interested in right this minute
is this business of research and development of Dianetics
and Scientology. And this has been the research and
development of demonstration of factors involved in life
and its processes, activities and goals. Now, with this
research and development has been entirely based upon a
very one-sided view which is why it is winning. It isn't
trying to make a new game, such as a game between me and
the faculty by which I prove conclusively that the
professor of Bumpology at the University of Squawdump is
wrong in placing a comma in the fourth paragraph. I mean,
this is - no game connected with it.

And this is about the dirtiest trick that ever got played
on the human race because it's something you can't tackle
headlong with any security at all. Because no barriers
immediately get put up. You don't get the automatic game
responses that should be put up immediately You see what I
mean? I mean, what we should be involved with right now is
a knockdown, drag-out fight with some school of psychology
or psychologists in general. We kid about it, but you
notice that we're not doing anything about it. Well, the
reason that we're not doing anything about it is because
the second we did, we'd simply erect a new series of
barriers and we would have a new game and a new via.

All right. What is a language? Let's go into this now. What
is a language? A language is a set of communication
symbols which each one, themselves, are a complication.
Now, in view of the fact that we're only studying the
symbol level of the Know to Mystery Scale - we're just
studying just this one level - let's just look at how many
phenomena there might be in just that one level and we get
a good grasp on this. There are about three hundred
thousand words in English. That means there's that many
complications which can be communicated as complications.
That's quite a lot, isn't it?

Now, the - that's one of those great big dictionaries - 
there's that many different words in it and each one means 
just a little bit different than all others. Now, if you go 
into the Oxford dictionary you get all the obsolete words too
and all the misspelled ones and all the foreign words in
common usage and all the derivations of words and you get
an awful lot of games. So here is a very easy-to-observe,
easy-to-duplicate game, isn't it? The game of language.
Which in itself contains, well let's be reasonable, for
most people a vocabulary of three-hundred thousand words is
an unthinkably large vocabulary. Actually the average
writer in the English language has a vocabulary of about
fifteen thousand words. The average college student uses
only about four hundred words. But that's still a lot of
complications, isn't it? A tremendous number of
complications there to play with. Even four hundred
complications is more than you would care to address as an
auditor in a quiet auditing session some afternoon.

Now, if we think of each one of these words as a
complication and if by complication we mean a via and if
the vias are there simply to make a game, we realize that
each one of these words is a kind of a little game all by
itself. And then we recognize that there would be at the
widest stretch of it about fifteen thousand games the
average person is playing. That's a lot of games, isn't it?
Fifteen thousand games the average person is playing, if
he's very intellectual and speaks the English language very
well. And that's why it's so easy for somebody by - like
Korzybski to come along and make a game out of language
itself That's even why it's so easy for me to come along
and say, "Look at those beautiful phrases in that prenatal
bank." What a game that makes! Actually, it's a highly
therapeutic game, but at the same time, look at its
complications. Because we're not talking now about the
fifteen thousand words, or even the four hundred words;
we're talking about combinations of words into aberrative
language. And this, of course, shoots the moon. Let's say
the average vocabulary of four hundred is simply put into a
lot of aberrative combinations and we probably have thirty to
forty thousand aberrative combinations.

We started, one time, in the first Foundation, to catalog
aberrative phrases. And as a matter of fact, you may have
seen a list that was partially compiled of this. But I was
highly enthusiastic about this because it seemed to me to
be a good idea, somebody to turn out a dictionary like
this. But they came in after a while and they said to me,
"Hey, you know, this list is getting awfully long."

So I said: Just a moment, let's take a look at this. And I
said: Let's see the average number of words known by a
college student is four hundred, and let's just take four
hundred as a factor here and say that the - looking down your
list there - the average number of words in one of these
phrases is about three and a half for all of these phrases
(the half, I guess, would be an "uh") and now let's take the
possibilities of combination of these four hundred. And I
started to write the multiple figure, just on this, and it
was something that had to be expressed practically with
binary digits. I mean, it's a fantastically large number.
Take four hundred words and combine them, randomly, three
and a half times, see. Ooooh!

And just as an example of this, I wrote down several words
on slips of paper and started to shove them around on the
desk blotter. And out of these, just several slips, you
see, we just - combination after combination after
combination. Of course, each one of these plays a more
complicated game than the last. Gorgeous, isn't it? The
number of vias which are introduced.

Well, that is simply no more and no less than the symbol
level. And if we speak now of the symbol level as a good
sound measure, as the only measure, why we might have some
win in sight even so; if we were just going to knock out
each and everyone of these word combinations. But
unfortunately, thinkingness can express more than symbols
can express; and that's just above that. And the number of
combinations of effort or form available, which is just
above that, gets a little more complicated.

Male voice: Yes.

And if you go to Hollywood the numbers of kinds of sex
involved becomes also very complicated, doesn't it? The
number of sexual symbols, activities, and so forth. Hum? So
all this begins to look like we're chewing off more than we
can easily bite, unless we have the key to all of these
riddles. And the key to the riddles is the one thing that
nobody would have expected and that is that: The necessity
to have a game is a necessity to cut communications.

Well, let's take the most elementary form of that. We take
a fellow who wants to play a game and, he wants to play a
game called "conversation." And he says to somebody, he
said, "How are you?"

Now do you realize that he has to cut his communication
till the other fellow hears and answers? Now theoretically,
if you - if a scarcity of communication is very bad, we can
recognize something very good here: that all you'd have to
do is keep up a steady flow of communication and if you'd
have to keep this communication formula just rolling from
all quarters and constantly and there wouldn't be any such
thing as aberration, would there? But you have to have a
barrier to have a conversation, you have to have a barrier
to have a game and the thirst for barriers is tremendous.

Now, every game has posed terminals and a weenie. This
communication particle (the weenie) which flows around or
gets changed or new particles or series of particles or
something like that. It's something these two terminals are
trying to acquire. Terminal A: now we're talking about
cause as having mass and effect as having mass, you see.
And we would have two terminals there; and what are they
trying to do? They're trying to acquire this communication
particle, this weenie of some sort or another. One of them
originates a communication particle and it goes to the
other one and then it is changed in some fashion or another
and it comes back and it is acknowledged.

Well, that is a very easy flow. But the amount of change of
that communication particle, the number of ways it can be
shunted before it gets to effect when leaving cause, the
number of ways it can then get buried and not answered,
and the number of ways cause can avoid - original cause can
avoid - acknowledging any answer given, all themselves go to
make up a tremendously interesting game. And when we get
"B" as a terminal not originating, we really get a
complicated game. That's a real complicated game. So that
we have somebody out in the open and somebody very much in
mystery as one of the game forms, which is one of the
favorite game forms of this universe.

Now we're so used to seeing a football game where the
eleven men stand up at one end of the field, visible, and
eleven men stand up at the other end of the field, visible,
and the weenie (the football) gets thrown around and viaed
and shunted and so forth, that we rather tend to think of
games as consisting of two known terminals. But let's take
the game played in the society. Let's take something less
artificial than a football game. That's an artificial war
because everybody knows they're all good friends anyhow.
They - nobody going to get killed, they're not sincere. We
also know that the boys will all be through with their alma
mater. And by the way professional football is nowhere
near as successful as college football; that is to say,
people go to see college games. Well, actually I won't go
see a college game because I know most of those players are
on the payroll.

I was, by the way, the first boy in America to bust that
story to the print - to the newspapers: professional paid
football players on college teams. I didn't get expelled
for it, my fellow editor got expelled. But he didn't really
get expelled, he just simply got disgusted. And he is now
one of the top sports editors of America. But the two of us
found that college, the college - our own college - was
paying, considerable salary under the name of scholarships
and bonuses and things like that, to good football players
in order to make a good football team. And they were
getting in more money at the stadium for every game than
they were getting in through the tuition window. And this
was an interesting story, we thought. So we broke it in the
college paper and broke it over the Scripps-Howard
newschain, which I was associate editor of the paper and
my pal was also a sports reporter, as well as a student, on
the paper.

Well, now why would that story make a shock? It would
merely demonstrate the insincerity of the game. These
fellows are being paid to play. In other words, it's really
not a college game, it isn't college spirit, it isn't the
viciousness and earnestness of a bunch of college boys at
all; it's just how much paycheck is there in it and,
therefore, it is a mercenary game, so the sincerity of the
game would be then doubted.

Now, I used to go down into Virginia when I wanted to see
football. I'm sure the boys in professional football played
very, very good and vicious football. It's just that it
isn't quite as sincere as it might be. You see, I mean, you
know why they're there, they're really not representing
anything. There isn't a big background to this push. I used
to go down into Virginia and watch high schools playing
football, and boy, that's football, that's murder. Those
boys get so mad at the other school and so on. So it's
definitely - definitely here you have two terminals at work.
But you have an enormous amount of sincerity involved, in
this and it makes quite a game. It's just the definiteness
or the amount of purpose.

So amount of purpose is apparently a deciding factor in the
game. How dedicated an individual is to this game: that is
the criteria. And of course if the basic game were survive,
naturally you would get this as a very fine game indeed.
You talk about dedication and sincerity; this fellow has
got to go the entire of forever in order to prove the point
that he has at least stayed with the game. And that's quite
a game, isn't it?

But, therefore, we have a tendency to think of game - because
it's talked down to us when we're little kids - to think of
game as something that is light, airy and has no real
point. And we think of life and sincerity and dedication
and so forth as something which is grim and very serious
and so on. Well, trying to make this game called MEST
universe very serious is a hard job! You recognize that the
fellow must know basically that when he kicks off he's
always got another chance of one kind or another somewhere.
He simply backs out. There isn't any single black five - and
you can remember this when somebody is terribly upset - we
had a case like this very recently. Somebody was terribly
upset because his wife was going to die and he wanted to
make sure that this girl did not just - you know, she was
dying of cancer and there was nothing to be done about it,
too far gone and all that - and he wanted to make sure that
this person didn't get stuck in the body or something of
this sort. And his worry was entirely foolish. The trick is
to try to get stuck in one. And a person is successful at
that, they feel pretty good about it. The moment this
person died why, this person was separate, and that's all.
Because the body machinery itself would stop cooperating in
pulling in the energy masses to which the thetan was holding.

You follow this? The moment the body stops cooperating in
the contest, why, the thetan - it's almost impossible for him
to stay within the confines and the space of the body. Out
he goes, swish! Now occasionally, under great shock and
duress, he will join the body entity for a short time, few
generations, and then all of a sudden why, there will be
another shock of some sort or another or a peaceful death
or something and he will back out and say, "My golly, what
am I doing here!" But sooner or later, it all comes apart
again.

Now, what's this about a hidden terminal I was talking
about? It's very - it makes a very, very satisfactory game.
Well, that is this seriousness trying to be added to it,
you see, this mystery. Now, when you stop communication as
often as it is stopped in life, you're bound to sooner or
later get on the tail end of one of these communication
horseshoes a mystery, no answer at all, you see, no reply
or no acknowledgment. So that we get a game, which is a
rather complex game, of a known terminal versus an unknown
terminal. And instead of an unknown cause, we get an
unknown effect point.

And that would be police and criminals - just as an example
of this - police and criminals. You see the cops around here,
they are very visible, aren't they? Well, they're - they
think they're at the causative end of the arrest line, but
they're actually the effect end of the crime line, aren't
they? And crime itself is out of sight, invisible and
unknown. You see what a - what a dizzy pair of horseshoes
this makes? And so we get these cops rushing around like
mad and eventually, by the way, a cop will question
somebody about this. He'll try to - he'll put something there
to keep from having a mystery there continuously and
forever and so on, and he eventually starts to pick upon
honest citizens. And you get this - this reversal of police
societies.

Now, you've probably, on the track somewhere, run into a
police society or two, where the - all of the honest
citizens, you might say, or anybody who was constructive in
the society was a criminal: definition of criminal. This
fellow would do something or something of the sort. And
definition of a non-criminal in this particular thing was
somebody who would only be dedicated to destruction and
mopping it all up and shooting everybody in sight.

We had an example of this here on Earth, not very long ago,
when the German Reich turned into a criminal state. Hitler,
for instance, could not even vaguely succeed to the rule of
Germany without the assistance of the entire German
criminal population. This criminal population turned into a
Schutzstaffel and we had anybody who was productive in
Germany, even vaguely, being immediately victimized, promptly.

Well, the police would look, you see, for the unknown
terminal and they'd look for the unknown terminal, look for
the unknown terminal, until finally, they would elect one;
anything that was handy. But that is an end of a game; that
ends a game to a very, very marked degree and starts
another game. So that the game is we have a mysterious
terminal and it's our purpose and desire to push this
mysterious terminal into view, and if we fail to put it
into view, we will then substitute for the mysterious
terminal an entirely different terminal.

And so we have psychoanalysis. We have Freud being very
rational, thorough and a highly competent investigator in
1884. Marvelous piece of investigation. He was doing - he was
working with Breuer, they were discovering the unconscious
release buttons and they were making people well; free
association just without further qualification was being
undertaken and it was very successful.

But Freud, in 1894, all of a sudden raised the unknown
terminal into a known position. See how he - how that went?
He actually was chasing an unknown; a hidden terminal, a
hidden terminal, a hidden terminal, and he failed often
enough to find this hidden terminal in cases, so that at
length, it was necessary for him to put a known terminal
into view; whether true or false. That's mostly because he
was playing this game with an enormous amount of sincerity
and seriousness. It became a life and death matter with
this man that he place into view something. You get the
feeling of desperation. For somebody to come up at the end
of the Victorian age with something as highly antipathetic
to the public as the libido theory, which he announced in
1894, well to less - a less able, less fast-footed man this
simply would have ended his career. It didn't end his
career, simply because it was the end of the Victorian age.

Now, here we had an example of this, of a known terminal
being shove - I mean, pardon me - an unknown terminal being
suddenly labeled and shoved into view without the unknown
terminal being shoved into view, you see? We've got to have
a terminal there, so we put one there and we say this is
the reason and cause for everything. And then,
within - within a very short time he was apologizing all over
the place and writing all sorts of books and so forth on
this to explain that sexual really meant social,- way off -
see, and let's qualify this and make it a more acceptable
terminal. He devoted nearly all of this time thereafter to
making this libido theory an acceptable theory; which is
the other thing these people do. And that in research and
investigation has almost always been the end product: is
trying desperately to make this answer, now shoved into
view, intensely acceptable. And that is the whole dedication.

You will discover people around, all too often - Well, we had
a boy in here the other day from San Francisco, who was
spending most of his time, just this, he was spending most
of his time trying to make this sudden shown-up terminal
acceptable.

Well, the way to handle it in research and investigation is
to be less eager to find that as the known terminal and
much more careful in scouting around to find out if there
isn't another terminal there too. And it is to this that
you devote your time, not to convincing people that this
terminal has been found. You don't spend your time
convincing anybody about anything, you just keep looking.
That's a game in itself. But here we have - here we have an
actual condition which has resulted in the society in - here
on Earth particularly - where the eagerness of - you know,
"It's got to be serious, it's got to be sincere," and so
forth - culminates in - pardon me, it's very, very well
assisted. Earth is not the heaviest gravity planet that
ever existed but its gravity will do. It'll do. And we find
that here on this planet, and if not on many other planets,
that the effort toward sincerity has culminated in a loss
of a game. Well today, today we look over this very easily,
very quick view here, we find something fascinating. We
find that the barriers are all here. So. You don't ins  
infer there's a game simply because the barriers are
there, by the way. Game requires actual punitive action and
continuing communication. Here are all the barriers. But
here is an Earth filled with automatic machinery at every
hand and all of it very complicated too, believe me, so
that if you moved out - let's say we did in or did for the
carburetor plants of the world. Wow! Oooh!

I was fascinated, one day, to discover that the game has
become so particular in the field of soldering, just
soldering, that a new company entered in some machinery
which was soldered as a difference from other such units
and so on, and their equipment was just falling to pieces
left and right. They had failed to discover how soldering
is really done. And we find that there are only a few
companies in the United States and only a few people in the
United States who really have the big know-how on how to
solder up a great mass of wires and tubes and equipment and
so forth. And that it is quite a particular job. So that
when a company undertook this sort of thing without
consulting the people who really knew this game of
soldering, why this equipment just was unworkable. And
they finally had to break down and farm out manufacture to
companies who were used to doing this kind of work. Well,
gee whiz, you know that's getting awfully specialized,
that's getting awfully particular!

A fellow is as able in playing a game as he can, under
duress, and if he has to, play a number of roles. Now, we
find the British machinist is not so far graduated away
from the handmade age that he has forgotten how to wear a
number of hats. Similarly the Spaniard, Spanish mechanic
has not gone so far from this. For instance, there are
several incidents I could mention of very complicated
pieces of machinery being missing, just utterly missing
anywhere in the country and just Lord knows how many air
hours and how much complication away, and I have had
British and Spanish machinists, both alike, without
turning a hair suddenly turn over to the lathe and the
drill press and the file and go to work. And in one of
these cases, they turned out the complete assembly for the
steering gear of a car. Have you any idea of the pitch of
worm gears and the intricate fittings of that sort of thing?

Well, the other day, here in this country, a machinist
found out that he didn't have a long enough - pardon me, a
short enough bolt. Every bolt he had there was over a
quarter of an inch too long to fit the hole. So he didn't
finish the job! It was not his business to cut bolts. Well
now, he was a long time away from the tradition of somebody
who would just make a bolt, see. And so he didn't even
think of cutting the end of the bolt off. He waits for
everything to be manufactured. In the absence of a
manufactured product, he simply stands there and looks at
the thing broken down and says, "There's nothing I can do
about it." Requires the manufactured product.

The other day, an electrical motor I saw taken back clear
across the United States to be rewound. There was nothing
uncommon about this electric motor at all. They rewind
them in shops all over town. But this particular agency
was not aware of this. They thought that a motor when it
was burned out was burned out and that was the end of it
and they had to ship it back to the factory, so they did
so. And this whole factory operates its agencies in the
United States like this. And the name of that company is
General Electric. Motors don't get rewound anymore in their
agencies, they get sent back to the factory. Well, they
might have had some - lots of reason for this but, boy,
this starts to make an awfully complicated game, doesn't
it? Nobody in those agencies can wear any other hat than
"Sign on the dotted line; move in the equipment. If the
proper bolts are present, bolt it down." This is not what
you might say fluid. You don't have an easily movable game.

Now, we take medicine today. The general practitioner is
getting so rare that they even write full feature-length
stories about him in Look magazine. He's getting this rare.
One he found was found to exist in the middle of New York
City and they wrote this whole article about him. Old
Doctor Pottenger, the very great old man of tuberculosis,
who has startled the medical profession many, many times
by simply going up to somebody and putting his hand on the
fellow's chest and saying, "Oh, my, two spots!" and so
forth. Unassisted by x-rays or anything else, diagnosed
it. By the way, they put - this was - got to be such a hot
point in the medical profession, they put up twenty-five
people with or without and with varying degrees of
tuberculosis on a stage before a medical conference and old
Doc Pottenger went down the whole line, simply put his
hands on their chests, one after the other, and diagnosed
exactly - corroborated by x-rays - and exceeding x-rays to this
degree: he wrote down the length of time each one of the
people had left, you see, if he had tuberculosis. And his
prognostication of two of the cases was exactly accurate,
whereas all other prognostications were wrong on it. In
other words, he was doing a better job simply by touching
their chests. This old man said to me one time - I knew him,
he was a nice guy - he said to me one time, he said: "The
trouble with the medical profession today is
specialization." He said, "It's all I can do," he said, "to
put up with this ridiculous position in which I find
myself of being an expert and a specialist in
tuberculosis." The old man could whittle up tibias and
carve out appendixes and cure sinusitis and do a lot of
other things, you see, but the public pressure on the
subject of tuberculosis simply kept him anchored in that
particular field.

Now, when a fellow loses his ability to wear a number of
hats, we might as well say the sentence has too many words.
When a fellow loses his ability to wear a number of hats he
of course, loses his ability. That is when a fellow loses
his ability. We might as well put the period there. That's
how you lose ability. You get so specialized, you get so
fixated on known or unknown terminals, you see, that no
flexibility can occur thereafter and so no change of game
can occur. And when you have everybody getting fixated upon
highly specialized terminals, you get this very interesting
condition, this tremendously fascinating condition:
They're fixed on their own terminals, not on anybody
else's, and by definition a game requires two players. See
that? 

Female voice: Uh-huh.

All right. So we have, in this world today, we have some
interesting bric-a-brac, tokens, lying around from old
games. Every kid out here, if you were to give him a pair
of big, holstered six-guns and so forth, he'd be a very,
very happy boy. That's just a token of an ancient game. The
fellows when they are taught medicine, they know they're
going to specialize in a certain direction and so
they - everybody makes a lick and a promise of teaching them
something else. That's a token of old games, the game of
the general practitioner you see, still being dramatized.
We have enormous numbers of tokens and amongst them is the
battleship, the destroyer, the cruiser and the aircraft
carrier. Amongst these tokens we have here on Earth - old
games which will never again be played - definition of a
token. The weenie of an old game, the weenie or terminal of
an old game which will never again be played. That's a
token. That's, by the way, anything Freud meant by tokens
is explained by that and anything anybody else ever meant
by these things. We find this fellow smoking a pipe and we
find out his grandfather smoked a pipe and his
grandfather's dead and he liked his grandfather very much,
that's a token, first-book token.

All right. We have airplanes, we have bombers, we have
bomber pilots, we have infantrymen, we have rifles. The use
of an infantryman, of course, is not entirely limited to
fighting battles. The infantryman is also dedicated to
sweeping the streets, barracks and things like that. So we
could say offhand that he has not terribly lost - completely
lost the terminal. Somebody's liable to come up brightly
and say, "Well, he can always be used as a police force."

Actually an army is the means by which a government keeps
its own population in line. That's to a marked degree true.
But no army is ever trained as a police force. These boys
are not trained as police and they would not even vaguely
be effective against the local citizenry. They could shoot
all the citizens with artillery, you see, or they could
level all the houses, but this is not being a police force.
And turned loose in an area to be a police force, I would
say that the most notable failures of all time were chalked
up in World War II, where military government was suddenly
usurped by a company or a regiment or a battalion commander
or something of this sort, of an area. The amount of no
government and no policing which immediately ensued was
gorgeous to behold. In the first place, could you imagine
using an M-1 in the streets of the city? The thing has a
killing carrying range of a couple of miles. See? This
is - becomes completely idiotic. In the first place, the
bullet would go through the man you were shooting. All of
their weapons, to this degree, really are weapons designed
to be used against other armies and other infantrymen. In
the absence of other armies and other infantrymen then we
must consider all these weapons a token.

There are many other things which are interesting tokens
here on Earth. The - well as far as that's concerned, the
tank. Anyone of these very high-priced items which is still
being built madly by the various governments of Earth is
completely obsolete. And I do mean completely now. We could
have said with some reservation this - if we were talking now
in - in 1946, yes, there's a possibility - was a possibility in
1946 such weapons, such tokens would again be used in the
game called war. But not today. Not today. In the first
place, the guided missile is sufficiently well developed as
to completely throw aside any possibility of using bombers
if you were doing a serious attack upon the enemy.
Therefore if - the guided missile, furthermore, cannot be
intercepted by any man-propelled plane. It can be
intercepted by a small rocket which is another little
guided missile. So we have an automatic machine fighting an
automatic machine.

But where do tanks come in on this? Somebody says, "Well
it's always the infantry that's got to pin down the
territory." What are you going to put this infantry into,
may I ask? Completely two-foot-thick lead shields so they
can walk through the area that's been bombed! I mean, what
is the - what are you going to use this infantry for? Who's -
who's going to - ?

Now, they're up there at the level of the continent buster.
There are only a few people playing this game. You could
say the United States Senate and, just to be polite, but
the truth of the matter is that if the United States
Senate were asked to deliberate on whether or not war
would - we have never declared, by the way, an aggressive
war to amount to anything - if the United States Senate were
to debate or be permitted to debate on whether or not we
were going to attack Russia, the signal would be adequately
telegraphed forward to Russia so that the US would be hit
first. So, you see, this couldn't occur so the US Senate is
not a player anymore. They are not players and neither is
Congress. Very possibly the president - president of the
United States probably a player - possibly. But the
probability is is he has this all set up automatically in
some fashion or another, in case he's out playing golf or
something. And we find then that there would probably be
the people who made, and the people who will service or who
do service, and the people who built the launching
platforms for, and the people who will touch the actual
button of' the nuclear weapon, are part of this game. But
is it a game?

In the first place - in the first place as we look at it as a
game, we find out that these people could not be considered
nationalists. You see, they wouldn't be playing on the side
of a national team really, because to loose such a nuclear
weapon today, would be to endanger and practically ruin
forever and aye the atmosphere of Earth. So I would say it
was these people versus the human race. But the human race
isn't fighting back. It isn't even offering even vaguely a
resistance.

There has to be some sort of resistance. It's not even
really trying to cut communications with this. It's not
really doing anything with regard to this missile. Here and
there some guy like myself happened to know a little more
about it. Somebody else would sound off about it
occasionally, just about the existence of this thing. But
that's not a game. It would probably get up into a game
twenty-four hours after they declared it, if any of us
survived. I know I would take the most peculiar and
delicious delight if I knew the current roster at the
time, and if I were left alive, in going and finding these
boys, because I would still find their flesh not entirely
impervious to a high-velocity explosive bullet. But I would
be willing to utilize this token. Now that sounds very
bloody and very vicious on my part, but remember it would
be after the fact that I would be willing to do it. Because
it would be very silly to do it before the fact. They'd
just hire somebody else. So it's not a good game at all.
It's not a good game.

The game the nations were depending on to keep their
populaces interested was a game called war. And that game
is over. It's the - it's the boys who press the buttons and
handle the stuff - the boys who press the buttons versus the
rest of the human race. But the human race isn't fighting
back and isn't even a target, you might say. These fellows,
if they stop and thought for a moment, are not trying to
obliterate the human race. The human race would just kind
of get in the road. So you see what sort of a game this is?

Well, here you have all the barriers, the tanks; you see
you've got all of the gimmicks, the bric-a-brac of games,
tokens of games lying around, which makes people think that
a game must be in progress for somebody somewhere. See?
And yet is there a game in progress? Well, you could still
say yes, there are some minor games in progress; there are
some minor games of one kind or another going on. There's
always a game when there's two guys alive - there will still
be a game of some sort going on between them. But it's a
minor game. There is no real fourth dynamic game then,
unless somebody comes up and stands up and represents the
fourth dynamic and takes these other boys by the scruff of
the neck - who are, in this case, the unknown terminal, you
see, the hidden terminal - and does something about this
that's very, very active and brutal. In other words, a game
could be made, but no game exists.

And there is your - I'm - the only reason I'm talking about
this is I haven't the, actually, the least notion right now
of doing anything on that particular level in any of the
patterns I have outlined. There wouldn't be any point in
doing any of this. They'd just hire somebody else and
they'd get snarled up in some other fashion; because there
are too many guys around who can't play a game. See, they
have all the bric-a-brac of the game but they're not
playing a game.

That - by the way, if you categorize a rough case just on
this basis only, you say, "this boy can't play a game." In
other words, he can't do 8-C, he can't do this, he can't
play a game. He does this with protest, he wants to know
why, and so on. A preclear processes as easily as he can
still play a game. All right. Your black five has all of
the barriers, all of the spaces, all of the hidden
terminals around with which to play a game; and he's not
playing one. He really isn't playing a game if he's playing
a completely unknown game, because all terminals are
unknown, including himself. So there'd be nobody playing
this game. Here is a complete playing field around which we
have a ball rolling occasionally, you see. You see what he
has done? He has actually ended the game and he has all the
bric-a-brac for the game and he has tremendous tokens of
game, but he doesn't have a game - not a game by which he
would be willing to unveil some of his abilities. His
perforce action is to narrow his abilities sufficiently
that he will again get a game. Now understand this: He
thinks if he narrows his abilities just a little bit more,
he will get a game. The bottom is right there, you see.
He's got lots of barriers. There's no game going on. And
therefore he doesn't feel like he's alive.

And there is the definition of being alive: having a game.

You want to be alive, have a game. That's about all there
can be said about it. The amount of communication that an
individual does determines directly the amount of life he
experiences. He does not experience any life if he does not
communicate beyond simply sitting still someplace off on
the side. He could do this, but he wouldn't have a game nor
would he feel very alive. I heard of one silly government
sitting out in one galaxy that simply sat there and knew
everything there was to know everyplace that was going on
in the galaxy. They did nothing about it. You see, they had
total communication and no game.

The case that you protest against most often has shut all
communications and no game. He's trying to shut all
communications and no game. So having total communication
and no game is equally undesirable as having total barriers
and no communication.

Okay.

(end of lecture)



