From squirrel@echelon.alias.net Tue Mar 16 13:50:18 1999
Path: newscene.newscene.com!novia!dca1-hub1.news.digex.net!digex!newshub.northeast.verio.net!worldfeed.news.gte.net!dallas-news-feed2.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!news.lava.net!anon.lcs.mit.edu!nym.alias.net!mail2news-x2!mail2news
Date: 16 Mar 1999 20:50:18 -0000
Subject: FZ BIBLE 16/35 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: <7f9a3870090713fe6c9e4ac30f348356@anonymous.poster>
Mail-To-News-Contact: postmaster@nym.alias.net
Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net
Lines: 1117
Xref: newscene.newscene.com alt.religion.scientology:689977 alt.clearing.technology:76117

FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST

9th ACC - THE SOLUTION TO ENTRAPMENT CASSETTES 16/35

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 16/35

9th ACC 12A (13A) - ONE-WAY FLOWS IN PROCESSING: QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD

Transcript of lecture by L. Ron Hubbard 9ACC12A    -   
5412C22 Renumbered 13A for "The Solution To Entrapment"
cassettes

ONE-WAY FLOWS IN PROCESSING: QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD

A lecture given on 22 December 1954


Any questions? 

Male voice: Yes - yes. We have a listening to
- pardon me, ignoring a communication line, it comes under
the heading of uh - the important factor that would be an
inactive or an inaction acknowledgment, an acknowledgment
without action or return motion.

No, not even acknowledgment. 

Male voice: To perceive it is to acknowledge it, wasn't 
that true?

Oh, yes, but this is the trick, you mustn't perceive it.

You have to learn how to look holes through things. You can
learn to ignore a communication line, but it's a little bit
of a trick. You have to look straight through it.

Female voice: This involves distances and posts, so do you
run any havingness at all on it as another kind of goal or
not?

Necessity for havingness is the necessity for communication
objects. 

Female voice: Yeah..

Necessity for havingness is the necessity for terminals
with which to play a game. And that's the - havingness is a
bundle of mismanaged communication. 

Okay, any other questions.

Male voice: Yeah, I know somebody who has got a sort of
deal, pushed, say, oh, within a space about yea far from
the front of the body or the rear, you get into about here
and you start to jangle. What would be coming on that?

I don't know, you tell me.

Male voice: Well, in terms of it, I try to think of this in
terms of body anchor points. I kind of think they were
unusually far out for this society, and don't...

He has gotten into one of these bundles of no
communication. You remember that a thetan to be alive at
all must be communicating somewhat. The fact that he starts
communicating is enough to excite and upset any mass he
contacts. He will upset any mass he gets near or around.

Male voice: What...

You talk about the universal solvent; this is a thetan.

Male voice: Chemical reactions take place where it will.

Yes, so that's what happens. He gets in toward one of these
ridges; he gets in toward a ridge, the ridge starts to run
out, and there we go.

Why do you think it is that simply looking at something
will make it vanish as far as a thetan is concerned? We
know that this will take place. All right, that's because
he goes into communication with it and it is a mismanaged
communication. To be an it, to be a something, we must have
had a mismanaged communication of one kind or another.

That's why we say "God built this universe." Now that is a
mismanaged communication, per se, it is right there. God
did not build this universe. And so that is mismanaged so
there is the wrong point of origin, see, some point of
origin is mocked-up, and so on.

A very fascinating thing starts to occur for the
individual, if you start to have all the places where you
thought of God being start saying "Hello." Fascinating
things occur with the individual, his life as a bishop runs
out and oh, my gosh! So this is a mismanaged communication.
It evidently results in mass.

I won't go so far to say that there isn't mass; there isn't
mass. A mass could exist you see that isn't mismanaged
communication. But the oddity is - is every time you go into
communication with mass, it to some degree deteriorates.

Female voice: At which level could you start running this,
if you have a preclear who comes in to your org, and you
can see exactly what it is that he needs? Would you run him
through the Six Steps?

You said it.	

Female Voice: Hum.

I might omit the last two steps, Remedy of Havingness.

Female Voice: And Spotting Spots.

.. and Spotting Spots. I might omit them.

Female voice: But they are -

But I would certainly do some 8-C and I would do some 
duplication. I wouldn't be able to resist doing some 
duplication on him, I want to see him sweat just a little 
bit because - to show him how bad it could get before I 
make him better just to impress him more. He wouldn't be 
impressed with the processing.

Yes, Miriam?

Female voice: Ron, do I understand, as you were doing that,
you say, for tnstance, "Have your shoulder, say hello to
your middle of the back. And then have the middle of the
back say hello to the shoulder." Then if he said "My
stomach has a somatic," you would say, "Have the stomach
say hello to the back...."

No. No. Don't change your process, Miriam, which is
creating a change. 

Female voice:  Well, I wasn't sure whether it was like the 
finger thing - observe my finger, observe my finger, observe 
my finger.

No, it isn't. It isn't. Here is the weirdity about this.
Once you have started to make an area communicate, why for
heaven sakes go on and make it communicate as long as you
get change.

Now, you as an auditor could make a mistake on which area
you wanted to have start communicating. That's why I am
giving you this talk about the back of the body. It would
be a mistake to make masses in front of the body start
communicating. Why? Because the back ridge would just keep
discharging, and you would have everything running through
the body, and there isn't any reason to chew up the body
when you can just start in, in back of the body, you see?

Female voice: Well, the rest was clear but I was not
certain about that one.

That's right, you just would - if you started in saying
"Shoulder say hello to the front of the back," pardon me, I
mean, "the small of the back" - "the small of the back say
hello to the shoulder," if you were to going to keep this
up for any length of time, that would be the process which
you elected, and you would simply, regardless of whether or
not his right arm went numb or the top of his head flew
off, or if he flew into an epileptic fit, you would simply
continue that particular process.

You would find out that the reason why all these other
things took place is you were displacing an energy mass,
see, and it was going over that way. Okay.

Female voice: Good.

Good.

Yes, Tam.

Female voice: There is another game, too, apart from just
fighting communication and doing something like that;
there's a game of instigated communication from another
source and then, nothing there, you withdraw it and then
you instigate it, right sort of - just starts to taper off
and you turn it on again, and then, nothing there. This
is - how do you know? 1 mean, I know...

That is the finest trap in the world.

Female voice: Yes, how do you gain, how do you run it out?

Just with a communication formula.

Female voice: The same way?

Mock up communication origins.

You see, you don't have to run as you are running it - I'll
make this very clear - you don't have to run a balanced
communication formula at all while you are running the
preclear. You could just have him sit there and say "Okay,
Mama." And this becomes brutally horrible. But it
certainly, certainly makes him aware of the fact that
something can happen.

And mind you now, that he isn't - Mama hasn't said anything
for him to say "Okay" to. So what! The lines are all
misaligned and imbalanced anyway and you have to remedy the
scarcity of any and every part of the line anyhow, so it
doesn't matter much where you start in remedying scarcities.

You can go on and remedy one thing like acknowledgment.
Now, you can remedy acknowledgment for hours. Well,
eventually acknowledgment will stop getting you any change.

The way it will stop getting you change is make something
tighter and tighter and tighter and tighter and it'll
stick - no change; it just sticks. You've just gotten out to
a plus factor of acknowledgments and there were an awful
lot of originated communications or answers or something
sitting around there which are now all jammed up.

Now, as you run "Okay Mama," "Okay Mama," can be an answer
and it will flip from answer to acknowledgment, from answer
to acknowledgment, from answer to acknowledgment. But don't
think that your preclear has an abundance of communication
to a degree that he will ever find enough "Okay, Mama's,"
you see? He won't drain the bank of "Hello" from Mama
simply by saying "Okay, Mama."

This is one of the oddities about this process. The bank
doesn't automatically sit up and go into communication.
See, it doesn't automatically sit up and say "Well, this
fellow is saying 'Okay, Mama' so therefore what should be
here are all these 'hello's'." The bank, you see, is a bank
because it doesn't understand communication. And that's why
it's a bank. So it can't defeat you. It can't defeat you as
an auditor. Huh?

Male voice: Oh that's a bank.

Male voice: That's a different definition of any kind of a
bank than I've heard.

Female voice: Yeah.

I did a funny thing one time after I'd made a preclear sit
there and say "Okay, Mama" for a long time, and I had the
preclear say "Okay, Mama" about fifty or sixty times, why I
changed tactics on the thing; I recognized the preclear was
fighting, he was going to get out of control here one way
or the other, and it seemed, the technique seemed to be
over its major calamities, I mean, there didn't seem to be
anything very desperate there. It was at first, the
preclear spilled a little grief and so forth, and then no
other manifestation took place for about fifteen or twenty
"Okay, Mama's" you know.

And then I started to remedy games simply by saying, "Well,
now have..." - because I was being very specific which you
shouldn't be, I was just trying to test the technique in
all directions - "Have Mama invent some games for you." And
I got an electronic explosion just as though it fired a
firecracker off in front of the guy's face. An electronic
explosion occurred.

Have you ever had one of these things occur, hm? Bang! What
had happened there, I guess, was just we had unbalanced it
to a point and just the additional thought of Mama
inventing another game, such as, "Eat your cereal" or
something, put him entirely out of control on it. We got a
nice comm lag on it though.

But regardless of what happens between the posing of the
question and the receiving of the answer you go on and
flatten the comm lag, so we did. Bang! One of the things
that can happen.

All right, any further questions?

Male voice: I know a couple of fellows who have been coming
up the line on their processing here saying - going out and
getting in an accident. These guys have managed one way or
another to get themselves assaulted physically by some
psychotic in the environment. I was wondering what, if
anything, the auditor could or should have done to smooth
this out before it happened?

Remedied games. Anytime they start picking on a psycho as a
game, Ha-ha-ha! This is - this is one of the last-ditch
games, see? "I have no responsibility for anything and
everything is responsible for me." Brother, that's just the
last-ditch sort of game.

We have got one out here now who is a "rational psychotic."
This kid out here is a rational psychotic, by the way. He
knows what he's doing. He also knows how horrible it would
be if he suddenly got sane and was sent back to wherever he
was supposed to be before he went psychotic as a solution
to where he was supposed to be. I'm sure that he was in
some sort of a school, boys' school or something of this
sort, which was too horrible for him to witness, and I
think he carefully cultivated psychosis in order to get
into that.

Male voice: Like a guy getting out of the army with a
Section Eight.

Um-hum. Sure.

This guy will snap out of it, we'll win. But do you get the
point now? If anybody is comm lagging on this one - . Do you
get the point of running 8-C? Terminals, the fellow with
his hidden terminals and so forth, with his attention
fixed upon them, scarcity of games which is also a scarcity
of terminals. There can be a scarcity of any part of a
game, and he goes over and starts touching the walls, he
discovers the terminals still exist.

Yes, Tam.

Female voice: You know that variation "Locate your body.
Locate the wall." If you run that this way, "that wall"
your picking that thing again aren't you? Does that run it
out too, or should you revert to...

It doesn't do too well. I tested it on Jonathan Kenworthy.
I had Jonathan Kenworthy running 8-C with his back to every
object he was locating for some little time, and he was
trying to read deep significance into what I was doing. He
was coming up the line much more slowly than straight 8-C.

The reason for this is, is the back ridge is a substitute
ridge; it's a substitute ridge. And as he tries to locate
the wall in front of him, he finds there's a bigger,
solider ridge in front of him, and the back ridge stops
discharging.

Male voice: So mechanically this business of osteopathy and
chiropracty on the back and side and so forth, mechanically
would be a communications formula behind that. That's why
they're getting results...

Anytime you get a therapy with a loose wheel in it, you got
trouble. And what we have been doing here for some time in
Dianetics and Scientology is locating loose wheels.

Where are the accidentals? Well, we found out that
acknowledgment was an accidental. See, I mean, some
auditors did it, some auditors didn't do it. Auditors who
did it got better results than auditors who didn't do it.
You acknowledge every time the preclear touches the wall
"That's fine" some auditors would say and so forth. Well,
it wasn't the fact that he was interested, it wasn't the
fact that he sounded alert, or it wasn't the fact that he
was paying attention, it wasn't any of these factors, it
was just fact that it was an acknowledgment of which there
was a great scarcity.

And as long as he didn't acknowledge, it simply created
greater and greater and more and more scarcity for the
preclear in terms of acknowledgments. And so this
auditor would then, whatever he would get the preclear to
gain on a mechanical process, would cause the preclear to
lose some of - so the case - by no acknowledgment. So we would
get a slow progress of the case. All right, that's a loose
wheel.

See, this one, you've got to tell the auditor "Acknowledge,
specifically, what the preclear just did or said." And
that's fine. It makes it rough on an auditor for a while by
the way. He's kind of scarce on these things himself; and
he starts to run things out the second he starts doing
this, so an auditor is liable to start doing this and then
stop doing this while he is auditing preclears, you see?
He's "Nahhhhhhhhh, I don't like the idea, ahha."

All right, now we take something like chiropracty. Any time
any science has said or any practice has suddenly said
"Well, now this is absolutely it, and we have reached an
unobtainably high thing, and we are at this unobtainable
point," you knew damn well that there were some loose
wheels left somewhere in it.

Now, as a demonstration of this we know more about the mind
than anybody on this planet has to date. All right. And we
can find loose wheels! Just get the idea here, I mean, the
amount of research and investigation which has gone on
here; the amount of practice which has gone on; the amount
of forward look which has gone on; the very inventive,
alert attitude toward how this is done on the part of
everybody doing this, you see, is to a point where at this
stage of the game to have some loose wheels like the
auditor must acknowledge, tells you that something that
leveled off god knows when, chiropracty, osteopathy,
Swedish massage, lord knows when these things leveled off;
but they were way back when they did.

Loose wheels, you'd say the proportion was 89 to 1, 
these boys are in there - now I am just getting to this point
on what you stimulated there on that question. You've got
your chiropractor, and get this one carefully, who is
simply manipulating the guy's back, and then you have got
your chiropractor who is talking to the fellow and putting
his attention on his own back, and between these two
chiropractors you would have a winner and loser.

So we have a chiropractor who is down here and he is very
orderly fellow and he is a nice guy and he is quite sincere
and everything and he just snaps guy's spines and fixes
them up and so on and he never gets any results, nothing
ever happens and his preclears, his patients, his subjects,
whatever you want to call them, are entirely out of gear
all the time and they drift away from the art of chiropracty.

And then we have got this chiropractor who says "Now, does
that feel a little better now, huh? Where's it exactly?"

By the way I remember a person who was very mad at a
chiropractor because he never asked her where her spine
really hurt. You know? So we - he says now "Where does it
really hurt? Now, it really is this -is this the area here?
Oh, a little lower? Is this it? How about that now? Okay,
now do you feel that? Do you feel that? All right, now just
brace yourself there a moment because we are going to do
something here. Now, yeah, good, snap! you know. Now how's
that? Is that a little better? Does that feel a little
better? Well, how about this up here now?"

You get a chiropractor who is talking this way, he is doing
what? He is laying on hands, see? And he is calling the
patient's attention every time bang! bang! bang! and of
course this person is going to get well; they are
going - they are going to not - maybe not get all the way well,
but they are certainly going to feel a lot better.

So look at the - look at this loose wheel! That is a heck of
loose wheel; that is "put your attention on it" is the
loosest wheel there, see?

So we have all over the shop practices in the (quote)
"healing arts" (unquote) where the practitioner may be
doing the technique exactly as given, according to
chiropracty or osteopathy or some such thing, and is
getting no results, and man is liable to get suspicious
after a while of all this sort of thing - superstitious.

Now, I am willing to make you a bet, I am willing to make
you bet that there are at least a thousand loose wheels in
Dianetics and Scientology. I'll make you a bet that there
are. But in view of the fact that we can produce the
results that we can produce, it's fairly certain that the
amount of tension on the subject is not necessary anymore.
I mean, we don't have to be real tense about this. I would
say two years ago we had every right to be damn tense about
this. See, "What the hell are the loose wheels around here?
I mean, what isn't being - what is being done that causes a
result, and what is the difference and so forth?" And we
could sit around and speculate and worry about this with
good right, because auditors were not getting uniform result.

This is why I look at auditors to tell me if we are on an
arrival point or are there other things we haven't
described? Are there things going on which we haven't
delineated? Are there any of these incidentals and so on.
It's a very important thing. But I would say off hand the
tension is fairly well off of this.

Right now there must be some kind of a loose wheel in the
treatment of psychosis. I can tell you that for the good
reason that I run a psychotic and they come up bing, see, I
mean, right up. It is a steep climb; it's burner wide open
on a jet plane, see? And another auditor runs a psycho and
they come up, fine, quick, see? And another auditor runs a
psycho and evidently does exactly the same thing that I do
and this other auditor did, and the psycho sits there,
"Huh." No jet planes. "What?" See?

Male voice: Some of them are failing to acknowledge the
comm lag yak in any way. Or, and/or acknowledging and
firing in another question instead of simply saying
"Hu-huh," and waiting or repeating the same question.

Could be. Could be.

Male voice: l know they're doing this.

Could be.

Male voice: . . . you say, "Where - where's your foot?"

Well, now that could be a loose wheel. For instance, I have
lots of - I always have lots of dogs and kids and live trees
and things like that around where I am usually, and I am
always talking to them regardless of whether they are
really in communication or not. A cat walks up - I get more
cats in good solid communication. They walk up and they say
"mewwww," and something like that and I say "mewwww," and
they look at me and they get puzzled about the whole thing
and they will finally say "mewwww," and I will say
"mewwww," and every time they will say "mewwww," I'll say
"mewwww," as long as I am around. And it becomes a very
silly proceeding; I start walking anyplace outside and
these cats will start - any stray cat in the neighborhood is
liable to start popping up and come over and look at me
very, very alertly and intelligently and ask me whatever it
is in cat language, I don't know.

Kids, kids that come around and they say - I have noticed
this with parents. You have probably got a real good point
there - because kids will come around and they will say,
"Jabberjabber-wog-wog-yag-yem-gillilyogo-wabble."

And you say, "My golly is that so?" And they will say,
"Yboggle-yogglejobber-jobber-wobble-wob." And you say,
"Holly cats, no!" And they say,
"Jobberjobber-wobble-wobble-wobble-wobble-jabber-jabber
jabber." And well, I say, "Well, okay, if that is the way it
is," and walk off. They're perfectly satisfied.

And I have been watching people around kids and the kid
says, "Jabberjabber-woggle-woggle," and the person pays no
attention to them, what they are saying, so the kid then
starts getting on a stuck flow.

Male voice: Clamorous for acknowledgment.

Oh, they get - they get frantic!

Male voice: Yeah.

They get frantic! And parents wonder why these kids have
got to climb all over them all the time and mess up the
furniture and spoil everything and knock everything down
and so on when it is obviously just as you've said; it's a
thirst, a craving for acknowledgment or originated
communication.

Male voice: Uh-huh.

If you don't want any trouble from a kid for god sakes
always say "Hello" when you see him. "How are you?"

Male voice: Another mechanical thing. An auditor if he
isn't damned careful around a psycho or for that matter a
sick person or people like this, commits continuously
audit - auditor's breaches by not being there physically. It
works this way. You know how the, say, the old wooden
spokes on a car wheel disappear when the car is moving?
Well, I, moving at my normal rate, disappear for the psycho
as long as I do this, or for a very sick person. I am not
there; invisible. They lose me. It takes them god knows how
long to find me again, when I've done this, just purely on
mechanics.

What do you do? Talk too fast or move too fast?

Male voice: Talk too fast or move too fast and you are gone.

Uh-huh.

Male voice: You slow it down even without body mimicry, or
anything like that.

Well, when you start working at a rate of speed around a
room, this is true of the normal person, now that you have
mentioned it, they stopped communicating to you, to that
degree you are gone.

Male voice: Sure.

Another male voice: Sure. Not only that but you're lost, and 
if the guy is just - people are so dumb on location if you don't
immediately relocate yourself they will sit there just
wondering where? Where? Where? We saw that with a very out
communication child. The same sort of thing with the
psychos. I have noticed people go away without saying "I'll
be back" or where they are going or they take the guy
around and don't even offer him an opportunity to say,
"Well, now at least l know where you are taking me."

Hm.

Male voice: Duplication. Mmm. Duplication adds to great
certainty on this. They always know they are going over to
the bottle.

Male voice: The auditor has to duplicate.

Mm-mm. Oh, yes, the auditor does have to duplicate very markedly.

By the way, in telling whether or not a psychotic is psycho
or not there's some very obvious points. One of them that
is a common manifestation that they don't know is a
giveaway, is the utter refusal to duplicate an action twice.

For instance you are running 8-C on them and they have
already touched the wall once, and they are not going to
touch the wall again. You should recognize this. You
should have them touch a lamp actually or something other,
entirely different, which they will duplicate again, and
then by the time you get them around to the wall once more
they have forgotten this and they will do it again without
feeling they duplicate it.

But this complete, utter unwillingness to duplicate,
obsessive, is a definite sign of a psycho.

Now, here's the difference between a - . We had to answer
this yesterday. We had actually to answer this question
bluntly. Are we looking at a posing psycho or an actual
psycho? Is this psycho mocked up simply as a psycho and
knows it very well, knows extremely well, or is he actually
nuts? Does he have such a vested interest in psychosis that
he has to continue this and knows it?

And the answer to that is no. Why? Because of two things:
One, the individual will not duplicate an action - not any
single action - will not be duplicated. The other one is this
individual masturbates in public, which is a definite
psychotic mark.

If an individual were simply mocking it up he would not do
either of these two things. He would get silly on them in
some degree or another or he would get random on them, you
see, and obsessively he'd start to talk to you about, "I
just have to touch this wall again," you know. He would
slip-skid in this. You being specialists of this particular
field wouldn't really be able to be fooled if you looked
over some of these factors; looked them over carefully.

Many people will mock up psychosis. In the service we had a
lot of boys who were nervous in the service and they would
mock up psychosis. And then they would proceed not to be
psychotic. One of them who was busy being psychotic was
obviously not psychotic at all because he knew who he was
mad at. He was mad at the Executive Officer. And he came up
with a seven inch knife to cut the Executive Officer's
throat, and chased him round and round and round officer's
country, passageways, and so forth. And he continued to
talk about doing something to the Executive Officer and so
forth. This guy was not psycho, he was mad. Got the
difference? Why? In the first place he knew who the
Executive Officer was and he knew where he was. This is a
dead giveaway, see?

Now, this guy starts to plead how nutty he is, ding-ding,
he's not nutty. He got mad, he got revengeful, there was
adequate cause for this also. A leave had been cancelled
for this person so he could go home, and his wife was ill.
You see? So this thing was all reasonable and all
rationalizable and the target of the individual was not
even vaguely confused. So if we - if we say that psychosis 
is irrationality, he has immediately disobeyed this.

He came out of this manifestation at once, that Doc Braff;
who was rooming with me - I was a navigator on this
particular bucket of bolts and I had taken in the doctor
out of charity - wanted somebody to talk to and he had very
bad quarters and I had very good quarters and so I had
moved him upstairs. And the patients used to come in and
they didn't much care whether I treated them or the doc
treated them. He didn't much care either. Only I told him
if I ever caught him navigating and changing the course of
the ship, I'd slip him some of his own cc pills in his ice
cream, and so we had a very good understanding on this.

So we had approximately two psychos a week on that ship.
And I got pretty well practiced in looking this over. And
of course at that time I was not very far advanced along
this sort of thing, but had done quite a bit of work in
this line. Doc Braff; on the other hand, had never been
trained at all, as few medical doctors have been, on this
subject. And so we used to hold courts on these boys, you
know, I'd be sitting up there doing nothing, Doc Braff
would call them up and we'd convene a board. Of course this
was a highly illegal sort of a board. It is not called for
in Naval regulations, but if we decided he was nuts, he was
nuts. That was that. And some of them really were nuts. And
those were the manifestations that were quite common.

But the common denominator of all such manifestations is
irrationality, non sequitur causation, inability to select
out any actual target. And when you had an inability to
select out actual targets, you would have gotten this boy,
who was going to cut up the Executive Officer, choosing out
the Chief Machinist, insisting he was the Executive
Officer, you see? You would have gotten this, certainly.
This was just lead-pipe cinch. He would have mistaken the
Executive Officer; that would be the first thing he would
have done.

Actually, the second I said to this boy, "Well, that was a
good try, that was a good try, and you realize that you're
probably going to Portsmouth for seven years now, and
accessories, and be reduced to apprentice seaman, and
you're all through with the war, and so on, so you have won
to that degree."

But of course, this guy said, 'Aw, now look."

And I turn around to Doc Braff and Doc Braff said, "very,
very good. Very, very good. That's fine. That's fine. What
will we do with him now?" In view of the fact that both Doc
Braff and I recognized as the causation of the psychosis in
the crew was the behavior of the Executive Officer, it was
just enough to drive any men who were under tension. The
trouble with that type of service, the 5th Amphibious
force, is there is a great deal of action occasionally. And
the rest of the time, why, it's not even hurry up and wait,
it's just wait.

And the oddities of behavior on the part of such men,
particularly if they've been away from the States for let's
say two and a half years; they haven't had any shore
liberty, they haven't associated with women to any degree,
they've just been out there. They're real daffy. They start
doing weird things. Strange customs are suddenly seized
upon. They start wearing a single earring or something of
this character. Men in the 5th Amphibious - by the way, you
probably saw some of them during the war, they'd hit the
beach over here - they were wearing an earring, usually a
star, a five-pointed star. But their behavior in general
had driven so far away from anything acceptable that the
task of telling a psychotic in the midst of this was
herculean! Impossible.

Oh, by the way, the other establishing thing is he did not
hurt the Executive Officer. He had every opportunity to do
so and did not hurt him. He still had the responsibility,
all he did was want to scare the hell out of him for the
benefit of the crew. We, by the way, transferred him over
to Boat Group, that is all we did to him; well, we gave him
a summary court and docked him a whole lot of pay which he
couldn't spend anyhow. Transferred him over to the Boat
Group as coxswain of the leading vessel, so he didn't last
the war.

Well, anyway, in this society at this time you very well
know what an average behavior is, you see? It's not an
artificial atmosphere. It's an atmosphere to which you are
very well accustomed. And as such, the departure from the
average with the inability to notice presence or select
targets can then be attributed as psychosis.

Guys are not smart enough to mock these things up. They
don't know enough about psychosis to mock these things up.

Male voice: When a fellow mocks up a psychosis which he
must have done eventually, wouldn't you the minute the
psychosis as such - the mock-up as such or enough parts of
it were either enforced or inhibited, wouldn't you have it
going...?

He goes the rest of the way. One - a very amusing thing was
the case of a person who was given a - a psycho - a Section
Eight, something like that, out of the Army. He was a - had
originally, because the Army was so antipathetic - he's a
medical doctor - the Army was so antipathetic toward him and
he didn't like the Army enough, so that he went down and
very carefully studied Rorschach, and studied it down in
the library thoroughly enough so that he could pass an
incontrovertible psychotic Rorschach. And then did enough
peculiar things to get himself shoved into a Rorschach
test, and when the Rorschach test was given, exactly
represented it to be a psychotic result, you see. And at
that time was given the heave-ho. This boy had done this
just to serve himself; you see. In other words, he got out
of it simply because he didn't like it. He didn't - hadn't
had up to that moment any concern about psychosis. He
immediately became worried, the second he was shoved out,
about his mind, started to go a little bit potty, and every
single one of these manifestations, every single one of
them began to show up. And they were - they were the - .

Rorschach is quite unreal, by the way, Szondi, Rorschach,
all the rest of these things are real bum tests. Never,
never count on them. We find him exactly dramatizing
everything he had read in the book was psycho. And I got
him over his psychosis very neatly. I didn't make him into
a more cooperative individual or many other things. But I
got him over it by running out all of his study of and
acceptance of these psychotic manifestations so he could
get out of the army. And I ran those as engrams.

And I ran them right straight on through over and over,
grind, grind, grind, grind, grind. Got interested in the
fact that he had actually condemned himself to his own
manifestation. Here you have the fellow has to accept this
game before it will become a real game, and before a game
becomes subconscious or unconscious, in other words,
unreal. By the way, do you realize that just recently we've
cleaned up what this unconscious is. It is an - a too long
run, completely buried game terminal of some sort or
another, which is no longer real to the individual.

And this manifestation can get into such a state, and it
starts in at the moment that the terminal is created. And
of course the moment he was released from the army, there
was no further use for this game. But remember it was a
game, so he had to hold onto the terminal, to kid with it,
and then because it was not acceptable socially at all,
particularly from a medical doctor, he then had to give it
a shove and instead of disposing of it, he hid it. And of
course we then had obsessive conduct, dramatizing the game
and so on. We find out that every manifestation a person's
got has gone this cycle. 

Male voice: Well, I wonder if you could take a guy that's
spun in, assume that at some time or another he must have
mocked up this spin, I don't care where it was on the
track, find the precipitating individuals, let's say
whoever enforced it, whoever inhibited it, probably the
latter, suppose your auditor went in there and put on a
fairly good act of being that person, but ran full comm
cycles in one fashion or another?

Very possible. Very possible as a treatment. Has the one
frailty of representing death instead of life. That would
be the only thing that would mitigate.

Well, we're validating still a suppression of his
psychosis. But it is very much worth a test.

Male voice: Make him look at it though.

It would make him look at it. It might bring it out into
the open, all kinds of things might occur. 

Male voice: It's sort of like a - like an actor who's having a 
ball about something, let's say he's playing Hamlet, I don't 
suppose it's ever been done, but you could certainly be real
recognizable as Hamlet without getting into the rest of the
liabilities of the thing, to some....

Hmm. Every single actor or actress who plays a psycho
part - the scarcity of roles for an actor is gorgeous. And
where you have an actor or an actress who hasn't had enough
roles, or has gone for some years without roles, they will
stick or fix in that. And so we get Vivien Leigh, we get
Gloria Swanson, see, Vivien Leigh with her "Streetcar Named
Desire," Gloria Swanson with "Sunset Boulevard." So this
was enough to tip me off a little bit. So I started looking
over the roles which some of these people had played
immediately before they went potty and they were all psycho
roles. And I can tell you from this, just as a prediction,
that would have some validity, there's a great deal of
probability that Humphrey Bogart is going to tip over his
apple cart in the very near future.

Male voice: He's had a lot of roles, so he hasn't any
trouble getting roles.

But, this is the one thing which would argue against this.
The one thing which would. But nevertheless he has gone
into this, and there's one thing very bad about this,
"Caine Mutiny" was a very successful picture. That's a win.
So it's off game again. See, you get everything coming off
game; when you get a win, you get a lose, see? Equally off
game. And equally you get the terminals first being kept
around or hidden. The lose is immediately hidden, but not
abandoned, see?

Male voice: Ron, you notice that Ed Robinson's kid has been
arrested a couple of times for robbing taxi drivers.

No, what was the background on this?

Male voice: The old man has played nothing but crime roles.

That's right, that's true. The kid is certainly mocking
himself up to be acceptable. It is safe to do and be what
your parents do and be. I am working that one to death. I
am working that one to death. It's a fantastic little
trigger by which to flip a behavior pattern on the part of
people in your vicinity.

You let them discover that you find it is awfully safe to
do something and very unsafe to do something else by
yourself doing it. Obviously doing it. And you will find
out that they will learn by mimicry. And they will snap to
it very fast. It just doesn't take any time. I mean, it's
one of these very, very quick ones.

You walk over, you find somebody's been - some kid's been
tearing up the flowers, see. All you have to do is not call
their attention to it at all, you just walk over and start
petting the flowers and being very gentle with them and
looking at them and so forth. The next thing you know the
kid leaves the flowers alone thoroughly. If you said to the
kid, "Don't touch those flowers anymore," crash, see, we
bring them right in on a terminal.

But training by example. I've even used this key a couple
times lately around the office by discovering that it was
very unsafe to do something. Real tricky.

Male voice: We've been talking about games, what are we
doing talking about acting? Does it work?

A game requires a terminal. A terminal requires a role. 
Doesn't it?

Male voice: Yes.

One of the more interesting processes which was dredged up
here in the last six months has never been relayed or used
until I mention it to you right now, is "name some romantic
roles." It's almost as good as inventing some games. It's a
fabulous thing, I mean, it's fabulous. Name some romantic
roles.

Female voice: Concerning that romantic roles as a game. I
asked someone if they were kissing their wife, who would
be doing it. So they started wisecracking, you see. And
they said, "Oh, my grandfather. Oh, my mother." You know,
just being funny. About five minutes, "Humphrey Bogart.
Clark Gable." Really.

Right.

Female voice: And then I got the one answer, me. I said,
"Fine. Who would be doing it if you were doing it now." Oh,
here I go again. That's the one thing, nowadays, nobody is
ever themselves in a romantic situation because they know,
they wouldn't be acceptable.

Well, this "invent some romantic roles" inhibits the fellow
from scraping the bank clean. And inventing games inhibits
him from that. You'd find if this would run, that's real
good. You'd find it'd run faster, you said, "Now mock up a
good person to kiss your wife. Now invent another person
who would be a good person to kiss your wife." You'd find
out a guy would have a rough time with this process.

Huh?

Male voice: Acceptance level would chew in there.

Oh, wouldn't it.

Female voice: Could you do that with blackness? Invent
somebody to...

With what? With roles?

Female voice: blackness, could you do that? Invent somebody
to be black.

Well yes, but at the same time blackness is an absence.
Blackness is an absence of communication. That's the end of
it. That's a - that's a technical definition you can use.
Blackness is an absence of communication. So it's of course
an absence of terminal and roles.

Well, okay guys, we have kept you way over, and I hope that
you can get on with this game a little bit hotter now.
Actually such a process invents to a very marked degree the
understanding of an auditor in using it. Although you will
hear me giving out this process, even giving out these
various angles of it, remember that the people listening to
this are not under training, they are not under any
responsibility to learn anything. They are not, in
addition, using it actively in practice sessions. You get
the idea? And in addition to that, people who are rather
out of communication have a tendency to fight a
communication formula.

One of the best ways that I would know of to learn this
would simply - to just process the hell out of it on other
people and get it processed pretty well. And a tremendous
number of considerations way in addition to what I have
told you are bound to show up. You can get a good
subjective reality on any of this stuff Nothing is easier
than getting a good one.

Now, I invite you to do something in your processing, just
as a test, just as a test of processing regardless of
whether it louses up the case or not, this we don't care
about. But just do it as a test. I want you to melt down or
make vanish at least one item, such as a ridge or a
swelling or an abrasion - this, of course, I know is
validating something bad; we don't care about that, see - in
the preclear, at least one small item so that you actually
can see this thing go by the boards. Got that? I want you
to actually see something disappear.

But you have to pick out something, not something general
like taking somebody's weight down or something like that,
but just pick out something.

Now you can change the shape of a person's face almost at
will with this process. You might even get in there sort of
on a plastic surgery basis and completely remake somebody
to look exactly like something or other by running the
process just so long here and just so long there. It's
almost molding. I want you to get this - this certainty on it
if it is obtainable for you simply by processing something
about the preclear.

Now, this will make you as an auditor, put you in a
critical role, you understand, by picking out something.
This immediately tells your preclear that you - that you have
found a blemish. But I wouldn't say reduce his head, he
probably needs it.

Okay? And anything I've been teaching you here now goes as
a process. I've been teaching you about games, even
romatic roles. Remember unromantic roles, see, that's too
way south. Process toward life, process toward
communication, process toward ability. You process toward
those three things, you win. You process in some other
direction, you lose.

Okay.

(end of lecture)




