From squirrel@echelon.alias.net Wed Mar 17 06:40:08 1999
Path: newscene.newscene.com!novia!sunqbc.risq.qc.ca!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!news.alt.net!anon.lcs.mit.edu!nym.alias.net!mail2news-x2!mail2news
Date: 17 Mar 1999 13:40:08 -0000
Subject: FZ BIBLE 11/35 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: <3287518bba968c4b600b94c43d7e9cf3@anonymous.poster>
Mail-To-News-Contact: postmaster@nym.alias.net
Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net
Lines: 675
Xref: newscene.newscene.com alt.religion.scientology:690208 alt.clearing.technology:76193

FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST

9th ACC - THE SOLUTION TO ENTRAPMENT CASSETTES 11/35

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 11/35

9th ACC #9B (10A) - HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF PROCESSES: 
QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD

Transcript of taped lecture by L. Ron Hubbard 9ACC9B   -   
5412C17 (Renumbered 10A on "The Solution To Entrapment"
cassette)


HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF PROCESSES: QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD

A lecture given on 17 December 1954


That would be the end of him. The guy would go so far down
into a degradation that he would simply shift entirely away
from the entire area of the planet. Such a-.

Female voice: Come here. 

Huh?

Female voice: Come here would he? 

Well, this isn't the worst planet by a long ways. But he
could. He could come here.

Female voice: Where would be the worst one? 

Oh, I don't know. They get pretty bad. 

Female voice: You know, it's SO disappointing-.

There's another universe that's a hell of a lot worse than
this. Oh, much. 

Female voice: Why?

There are about seven universes - pardon me, there are about
six universes south of this one. Oh, because of the
monotony of constituency of the universe, that is to say no
variation to amount to anything in it and yet the people
inhabiting it yet capable of considerable complexity,
unable to achieve any complexity at all. How would you like
a universe of mud? There is one. Nothing but mud.

Female voice: This is the thing that's so disappointing.
These people that you mentioned have that - such terrific
intelligence of individual mind, this man on Marcabian,
being on a planet you mentioned; and yet, they seem to
lack, from what I've heard of them, any basic goodness. I
mean there seems to be such a - . It's so very disappointing.

You see, this planet's not necessarily good or bad, it's
just that the games which have evolved in there are heavy
planet type games. They have a lot to do with space opera,
they have a lot to do with cops and robbers and so on, and
their technology is quite superior and quite advanced. It's
the kind of a - you see, a great intelligence doesn't
necessarily denote either a great moral principle or a
freedom. 

Female voice: So that as thetans, they may - might
be lower than we are actually. 

Oh, yes. Yes. Yes. But their whole idea is to get people inside. 
You could imagine, you could imagine a planet made out of a 
population all of whom had an insane, compulsive exteriorization. 
How would you - how would this look to you?

The heavy, the heavy-planet boys are the ones that, have
occasionally attracted my great interest. They start
working immediately with radioactive stuff; they never go
through a fire stage. See, they never, never have the
civilizing influence of fire. Fire is a civilizer, and you
have to work and you have to get quite complicated with
fire. If you had boundless supplies of radioactive
materials; if everybody around was more or less conditioned
to radioactive - radioaction of one type or another, you
would discover that you had no real lack of fuel. So you
could do some fabulous things mechanically; you could set
up in the physical universe some fabulous mechanics. You
could build a space wagon that would run for an awfully
long time. You see? And you could do all sorts of things
like this.

But what they do is, is they never learn how to be
civilized before they have the tools and weapons which
require an enormously advanced civilization to control.
Now, somebody very bright comes up in that society where
everything is very easy for everybody, you see, you know no
great lack of fuel or anything like that. And somebody real
bright suddenly turns up either by his experience or
something of the sort, and he finds himself in the
interesting position of having to use his intelligence on
a suppressive line if he is going to survive at all or if
the society's even going to stay there for a moment. The
criminality of such a society is fantastic! The amount of
criminal action that you would consider criminal action.
The amount of respect for the individual is zero. Why? Here
you had a society evolving in the presence of enormous
quantities of fuel, which - anyone of which fuels would
supplant any ability of a thetan. Now that is a type of
Garden of Eden which would backfire, wouldn't it?

Such a civilization is the civilization of Marcab. For
instance, anybody approaching - this was some little time
ago - anybody approaching a particular judge there - would
find himself, if he was considered to be in contempt of
court or anything like that, simply fried since there was a
curtain of radioactive material which went clear across
the front of the bench anywhere that a witness or anybody
would stand, and so on. Push button. This judge, of course,
had the right to do this. What gave him the right to do
this? The possession of the control of a great many
radioactive substances. So we would not have any idea of
mores or morals based on anything else but forte main. We
had a civilization here on Earth which was based very
heavily on forte main in the Dark Ages. Forte main - might
made right. Now, that was all there was to that.

Male voice: Not-is, not-is, not-is. Yeah.

Female voice: Is - are there any places in the universe where
the thetans are at a high level and where ethics do exist?

Oh, yes! Yes, yes, yes. Oh, my, yes. To a much greater
degree than here. However, they have been very civilized.
As far as technology is concerned what's real wild, what's
real wild is the degree to which all of these
civilizations are running on the automatic evolution which
has simply taken place without any real inquiry into the
situation. There's the entrance point of the MEST universe
- we hear about this often - is not an entrance point of the
MEST universe at all, but it is a bunch of people who claim
they are the entrance point of the MEST universe and who
indoctrinate people into entering this particular universe.
But the people are already in it. There's some of the
Planet Builder's Societies which existed in this galaxy and
have since gone practically out of existence in this galaxy.

Female voice: Gone broke have they? 

Huh?

Female voice: Gone broke. They must have gone broke.

Actually, the amount of planet building which goes on in
this galaxy now is practically zero; it's no longer in that
nebulous state which invites planet building, you know, in
great quantities. The action of building a planet was all
very friendly and all very nice and everything was fine at
this end of this galaxy for quite some long time. And then
as the game started to go to pieces we started getting
people hiding the automaticities, you know, hiding parts of
this game, and it made automaticities; and the planet
builders who were in this particular area went by the
boards. See, they went rapidly by the boards. Why? Well,
just simply on the basis of the game. You see? Anytime you
get an ended game, you get a chaos of one kind or another.
People don't necessarily learn from this chaos.

You take, for instance, this society going now on a
evolutionary cycle of the - such a parallelism to so many
societies' evolutionary cycles that it doesn't look like a
game to me. See? It just looks like a big bumbling
automaticity that a bunch of intelligences get to work and
they suddenly work themselves into a point of where
there's only a handful of guys on the planet who can play
the game; and that game is blowing up this particular planet.

Male voice: The cycle of existence. 

Huh?

Male voice: The cycle of existence. 

The cycle of existence, right! All right.

There is - there are several lessons. But there's some
existences, which are not necessarily antipathetic towards
survival, but these are where people are willing to make
games out of things. Instead of - the one thing that nobody
has ever learned, though, as a cardinal rule, has simply
been this: The way you end a game, the way you end a game
must include in it a way to make a new game.

And the ending of a game can be a very serious affair, can
be a very - a very catastrophic affair as any preclear may
have experienced. You suddenly get him over his lumbago and
that is his favorite game. And it's a hell of a game, if
you want my candid opinion, to go gimping around all the
time; that's his total game. And you get him over this game
and he gets mad as hell at you; he gets real mad at you.
Well, if you simply go around ending lumbago, such as maybe
chiropracty or something like this would do, you're playing
up the line of a great liability. The only safe way to
process would be a direction which we have always more or
less processed toward and never articulated particularly
and that is an increase in general ability so it naturally
increases the individual's ability to have a game. Don't be
surprised that you practically clear somebody rather easily
and then find him out there in the insurance business,
see, instead of staying with Scientology or doing something
for you or somebody else. You've improved his ability to
have a game. He'll go out and get a job, he'll go out and
do something, he'll go out and learn how to play a piccolo
or anything, see? But he is playing a game. Now, you get no
kickback from this preclear, but also at the same time you
lose him.

Female voice: The point is there - I mean, those that - those
that do that are very limited - limited in another direction
as well. They're limiting themselves deliberately in order
to play that game. But with processing most preclears they
get a glimpse of what they could be or it tends to generate
them a jolly sight harder than anything they've got.

Well, you're processing toward truth, and have
consistently. The only time that we would really get into
trouble is supposing we had a process whereby the snap of
the fingers on the part of the auditor would restore the
complete use of the right leg, which has been paralyzed up
to date, you see? All right, pang, see, and that leg is
then restored. You are going to get chaos. Just as they got
chaos a couple of thousand years ago here on this very
planet. You see that? With no volition on the individual's
part at all, he was suddenly cured of leprosy. Yaaaah! Now,
we don't find any of these, really, many of these people
that were cured in this fashion suddenly following in the
van and doing all sorts of things, you know, we didn't find
this at all. But we found an awful lot of people ganging up
to hang this man, didn't we, huh? That civilization
couldn't rest until they got him on the cross, nailed tight.

We have no slightest idea how many miracles - because of the
later impact we can't doubt the fact that something
happened then and that somebody existed at that time;
we - something happened, there was somebody around. But the
very violence of this seems to denote that a great many
more people were affected than are commonly listed. And we
discover obscure mentions in the various books of the
Bible of this and that happening, such as seventy disciples
going out and they're supposed to heal everybody in sight.

Male voice: If you cured - if you take six psychos and you
just, you know, magically waved a wand and they're well,
what would happen to all the people around them? How would
they feel, the people around them who had a vested interest
in their psychotic, that's - Well, they'd want to hang you,
of course.

Male voice: - other people's games. Mmm.

Male voice: It's real hard to make some of these psychos,
and you come along and mess that up: silly boy! Mmm.
The psycho, of course, being so helpless is very easy to
own as a terminal. 

Male voice: Oh, boy. 

Male voice: Oh, it's true.

Yeah. And similarly, a person who is - who is in bed. But
increasing an ability as we have, well, almost always done
to some degree or another, we have escaped in Dianetics and
in Scientology this tremendous kickback that has
practically ruined several fields. Which has caused, by the
way, the Christian Church to almost utterly abandon healing
as any sincere endeavor.

But the raising of ability is a very secure line of action.
But raising ability to do what? See? To play a game, and
that is a very, very secure, good, easy thing to do.

I had a fascinating thing occur one time, with a couple. I
might tell you about it just apropos of nothing. The wife
and the husband had been quite quarrelsome one with the
other, in other words, their game was fighting each other.
And I processed the husband. And it looked like it was
going to be the standard line of where then the wife would
get mad and this would blow fuses in all directions. But
the husband changed a consideration which was an
interesting consideration to change: That a woman, was not
a legitimate opponent. A woman was something you fought
over or fought about, not somebody you fought with.

Now, whether this is true or false we're not interested,
but he did change his consideration to this degree. And it
changed the marital relationship, but the marital
relationship hung together. This is probably a little bit
more, well, atavistically, possibly a little closer to the
truth. This fellow had been raised by a great many sisters
and he had gotten firmly fixed with this idea that the
person you fought with was a woman; he was absolutely fixed
on this kind of a combat terminal. And that, of course, is
a very silly combat terminal.

I mean, he would have to stay down in the field of
argument, of thinking, you know, of doing this and that to
carry the fight - nagging and fault finding, to carry the
fight forward at all, you see? In view of the fact that he
was not a small man and if he'd ever wound up and hit a
woman as hard as he could, you see, he probably would have
killed her. So it was a completely stopped flow. He was
holding himself back from entering into physical combat
all the time. All because of course, you could say, his
early indoctrination. But actually simply because of a
mistaken terminal.

What did happen and also might be of interest to you, is
that he discovered some other things he could fight. There
were other things around; there were other terminals. And
he had been neglecting his business most gorgeously. He
ran a chain of service stations and he'd just been
neglecting his business and neglecting the employees and
neglecting the attendants, you know, and the managers and
so forth and he started to go to war with these boys. And
they found that he was not a legitimate opponent as far as
they were concerned and they just quit fighting with him
and immediately went to work and he became very successful.

Female voice: What happened to the wife?

In this particular case, as it might or might not be in
many, many cases, the sudden release of constant bickering
as far as he was concerned and his sudden understanding of
her, or that is to say his putting up with what she was
doing, he wasn't looking for every chance to claw her eyes
out or do something of the sort - made her go find somebody
else to fight with too. But she didn't go on trying to
fight with him. Now, in just as many cases you could say
possibly that she'd suddenly find no terminal there to
fight with and she would pack up and leave or she would go
into apathy or she would get sick or something bad would
occur. In this case it didn't occur.

His attitude to her was thoroughly changed. Anytime that a
husband suddenly starts to bring home flowers and take
somebody out to a theater just because of something he
wanted to do, you see, not even necessarily because (which
I was amused at) not necessarily because he wanted to make
up to his wife for anything, but this was the proper thing
you did for a woman. He evidently went back on a pattern of
about 1850 or something like that, one of these older
patterns of treatment of a woman. I mean, he just was nice
to her and gave her things and so forth and was very
tolerant of her. There was no fight possible because this
was not somebody you would fight with.

Male voice: Is there some way you can do something about -
I know one fellow like an Irishman in a pub and
only - everybody's too small for him. He's looking for
somebody to start a fight with. This guy's probably going
frantic because he can't do it, he's - either it's not worth
it or else they're above and beyond fighting with him. Can
something be done for him directly?

Well, I'd give him a nice big mountain to fight.

I'd get him fighting mountains and oil wells. He has his
attention too firmly fixed on people as a target. It's very
easy for a thetan to tackle MEST. 

Yes?

Male voice: On the process that you talked about before
having the writer mock up using communications. Would you
run that before 8-C?

On this particular writer? Remember that any subjective
process has the liability that it's not going to be done. I
would not vaguely process anybody until I was - on a
subjective process - until I was awfully sure that they were
capable of obeying an order which I myself gave them. They
might not find themselves - they might not obey the orders
from life itself, you see, they might be so far out of
communication still that they would only obey - you know, we
didn't run it too long, we didn't run it very long - but we
certainly did get them up to the point where they would
obey the auditor's order. And only then - you see, they'd
still be comm lagging and doing other things but they were
doing it, see, they were trying. Only safe thing, I mean
the only thing you could worry about is that they would
skid suddenly. So when I do a subjective process on
somebody, I intersperse them with 8-C. I let them go
subjective until I find that they seem to be wandering or
combative with me. And then instead of fighting with them,
which they obviously want to do, I show them that there are
some more terminals around by having them touch the walls
and so forth and then I go on and process them with some
other process.

Male voice: How long would you do that? 

Hum?

Male voice: Is 8-C interspersed in there? 

Just until I was absolutely sure he was following orders.

Male voice: I was running him on steps one and three on
SOP 8-C and about every, oh, ten minutes - no, about every
five minutes for a while on Holding Corners, then, "Hey, go
over and touch the wall," do it about twice, send him back,
and go on for a while. 

Uh-huh.

Male voice: It didn't take much.

Curious. In this particular case this fellow has had quite
a few hours of 8-C. There's only one trouble with this
particular boy: His activity in life. His most recent
activity in life operates as a tremendous barrier to him.
And that is very much of a thinkingness activity. He
basically wasn't looking for any terminals to fight, you
see? He was simply putting ideas down on pieces of paper
and all of his fighting was intensely synthetic - it was all
on the pieces of paper amongst various characters with a
complete stuck flow. Now, this individual possibly could be
run on enough 8-C to snap him out of it. There's no doubt
about it that it was therapeutic. But what I'm talking
about is the rehabilitation of a single ability. And that
would make the grade.

Female voice: Hey, you said something else this time; you
said he didn't have any outflow power. Now, we can think of
writers, for instance, Heinlein has outflows toward
sometimes. 

Female voice: And some of these other things we
have to outflow toward, which is quite different than just
putting - 

Another thing is - . 

Female voice: - it down on paper.

.. is practically no writers today ever tell stories.
There are a few of them around, the better ones do. They
tell stories to groups of people. And, you find somebody
who is rather moody and a little bit having trouble with
the society or with people and you put him into the field
of writing and you've got real trouble because he's going
to get a stuck flow sooner or later. He's at least never
going to get any acknowledgment.

For instance, the damnedest guy I ever knew - he is a louse,
he is a dog, there is no doubt about this - a fellow by the
name of George Bruce, and he's writing out for MGM, or was,
making quite a bit of money. He used to write aviation
stories and so on. And this guy possessed the facility - the
only reason which kept him going as long as he did - he
possessed this enormous facility for being able to take a
crowd of casual people and tell them some exciting
adventure one way or the other and I don't care if it was
an awfully big room, they, even the waiters serving the
cocktails over there, would just get thoroughly wrapped up
in this - in this fantastic story which everybody knew was
probably a horrible lie anyhow. But they would all get
wrapped up in it and they would laugh in the right places,
you know, and then look horrified; and to do that in this
blase', modern society is quite a trick, quite a trick to
get very much in social - you go out on parties or something
like that. It's fantastic. Well, George Bruce was still
able to do this. I never saw the like of it. I mean, I've
sat there and listened to this boy tell some of the most
horrible swindles and complete utter lies and actually
have seen waitresses stop at tables, just stand there with
their dishes in their hand listening to this. It - his
presence was terrific.

Well once upon a time, probably in Shakespeare's day and
earlier on the track and so on, ninety percent of a
fellow's writing was probably done this way. And then he
would sometimes put it down because his friends insisted
and then it would get into a published form. Published form
was very secondary. Here the published form is primary.
And that will murder off art everyday of the week. We find
in the Renaissance, who was it, was it Michelangelo that
used to go around and announce the fact he'd been there by
drawing a perfect circle on his friend's door? He was the
only one in town that could draw a perfect circle
absolutely freehand. You know, pang! And we discover in the
earlier part of this century the - and the last part of the
last century the painters around Paris, and so forth, just
didn't care who the hell they painted for. They'd paint all
over the wine shop and they would paint all over the tables
and just anything, anybody, anywhere. They were always
assured of an audience.

Female voice: Robert Louis Stevenson -

Oh my yes! Yes, indeed. Sure. His first - his first, when 
he was even out in Samoa, he had an old pal by the name 
of Judge Chambers and he would tell Chambers, who was I 
think resident or something, judge, part of that commission 
that was governing Samoa at the time, and he would tell him 
a story and if the judge fell asleep Stevenson wouldn't 
even write it.

But, here is as you see this canned entertainment move in,
for instance not even a writer today supposes that anybody
was at the other end of a TV program. No, that's right; I'm
talking - talking factually, not sarcastically.

Male voice: He writes it for the producers and the - .

Yeah. It wasn't - it wasn't toward the public. We know that.
We feel no presence of a storyteller in such programs. In
magazines, today, we really don't feel the presence of a
storyteller. We feel the presence of a, of a pattern of
some sort. There's got to - lots of it and it has to be
turned out to a digestible standard. And therefore,
reading popular fiction today does not fulfill, for a
writer, the origin of the communication for him because he
wrote it for the publisher and so did the other writer.

Male voice: Edgar Rice Burroughs.

Edgar Rice Burroughs. Yes. Of course Edgar Rice Burroughs,
weirdly enough, was, he and H. G. Wells actually loom up
now in this day and age as being terrific towers. My God, I
mean this - the man - the imaginative flow which that man
turned out compared to what you're picking up off the
newsstands today is fabulous. But we even go into this
level of operation that he was doing and we can look on
that as being a rather giant operation. We're having a
rough time today in the arts, I should say.

Female voice: Look at where H. G. Wells ended up. His final
book was apathy, apathy, apathy all the way through.

Sure. Of course H. G. Wells was in a horrible position.
There were, during his lifetime that he was aware of
people being around, what he chose as contemporary authors
to himself must have told him as well that he was being
very generous. He was a social revolutionist out of his
time and period; just madly out of his time and period. The
day of the social revolutionist was 1870 and that was not
Wells' date. Well!

Female voice: He made an awful lot of right predictions too.

Oh, you bet.

Female voice: Few of them were wrong.

That guy must have a stuck flow on being right.

Next life I bet - that's right. Next life I bet he'll come
back and work for the Bureau of Internal Revenue. Something
to be wrong!

Okay. I've held you a long time over. I suppose you better
go to your regular auditing period. Now, I want you to
be - make sure that you understand subjectively and as an
auditor the consequences and results of remedying
communication scarcities. I really want you to understand
that. There are three scarcities: origin, answer and
acknowledgment. And I want you to understand very, very
well what happens with regard to this because this is the
basic playing field. It exists before barriers because
communication itself is simultaneous with barriers. I want
you to get a real good look at this and then we'll open up
our guns on the invention of games.

(end of lecture)






