View source for Definition of Control (FC 570704)

'''Series:''' Freedom Congress (FC)

'''Date:''' 04 July 1957

'''Speaker:''' L. Ron Hubbard

----

← [[Lecture_Index_FC|Back to Series]]

How are you?

Audience: Fine.

Voice in audience: F4 a 60th, ASA 200.

ASA 200 f4 at a 60th. I see people running around here flashing flashbulbs at
these congresses. The light up on this stage is so hot that I very often have
very hard trouble finding my body. The light goes through it, you know? I just
thought you might like to know the light reading. Now that's for Super XX
that is, for Super XX that would be a 30th, f4. And a box camera will do, sim-
ply on your, your Plus X, your 50 Weston and so forth, your Plus X, I suppose
those are, I don't know what those openings are. But you actually would just
get a picture if you just opened it up and snapped it. Just on ordinary, routine
film. And all these flash bulbs keep going. See?

I want to introduce to you two very important people. Two people that you
should know at this congress, if you don't already. The first of these is Mary
Sue Hubbard. Well, you have some popularity out there, huh? She must have
hired somebody to do this, that's all.

Voice (MSH?): No, no, the sign's over the side. (?)

If you have any fainting spells or, or children, or you want to meet somebody,
or so forth, why, you see Mary Sue. And if there's nothing anybody can answer
for you or you just don't seem to be able to, to get the communication, you see
Mary Sue.

MSH: I'll fix it.

She'll fix it up. Thank you. She's your hostess.

And now I'd like to introduce to you your congress manager, Dr. Dick
Steeves. I see that you've paid somebody down there, too. I see this. Dick has
handled many of these congresses now, he's getting to be a very, very, very,
very, very old hand at it. And if you've noticed, these congresses are getting
smoother and smoother and smoother. And if you haven't noticed at this time,
it is being run with considerable precision, which it just never had any ac-
quaintance with before, at all. Isn't that right? And for all that we have to
thank Dr. Steeves. And I wish to inform you, if I never have before, and if you
haven't noticed it before, that Dick Steeves is actually now the organizational
secretary who is in reality in charge of the Central Organization in Washing-
ton. So he's a very important fellow, so always say the right thing to him, pro-
pitiate him with the proper present, and you've got it made. Thank you Dick.
Thanks for a very good congress. OK.

Now that I've given you the substance of the situation, there's hardly anything
left to talk about at all. That's it, see? That's it. So, I've just got to kill time now
'til the end of the congress.
Hardly anything to discuss. Hardly anything to discuss at all except a few minor fac-
tors that might have escaped your notice. Now having over-simplified it a thousand
percent - you remember in the last lecture, I just over-simplified it all over the place.
Terribly over-simplifying.
Now I'm going to over-complicate it. I'm going to tell you about it now so that just
nobody could understand what I'm talking about. This lecture is so complicated that I
don't even know what I'm going to do just to get started on it. That's why I havn't
started on it yet. It's complications are so extreme that as I glanced over my notes - I
have several pages of notes... Ah, somebody present doesn't believe me. You notice
every lecture is totally plotted out.
LRH to someone in audience: „Would you give me that Congress program you have right there
please? Sure you have, yes. Thank you. Thank you.“
I want to show you every single lecture here has a name. Every single one. It wouldn't
be a Congress unless I pointed this out to you. Says lecture number two - you'll notice
there was no lecture number one. I'm now engaged in giving you lecture number
three. Now that shows you, these lectures did have titles.
Actually I had a terrible thing happen at the London lectures. I was over in London -
Royal Empire Society hall just a few months ago and they had a wonderful Congress
over there. I was all surrounded by plaques of impacts. As a matter of fact I was so
overwhelmed every time I walked in the front door of the Royal Empire Society hall
what with all the handmen and footmen and so forth. I was confronted, every time I
entered the building, with the Cecil Rhodes room and Cecil Rhodes' bust and all kinds
of busts. And... we actually were the ... one of the first gatherings the organization had
there after it was recompleted. It took them years and years and years to build it back
after the war. It was all bombed to pieces and they built it all back and when they
mounted up all of these Empire plaques for South Africa and New Zealand and Aus-
tralia and everybody and I was standing up on the stage, you see, surrounded by all
this grandeur. I got terribly overwhelmed and it was very upsetting because I had to
explain to them that I had forgotten all of my Congress notes. And there were three
or four people who didn't believe me and spoiled the gag. (Laughing)
But if you will notice here - if you will notice here it says lecture number three. And
lecture number four, number five, number six. And then there's lecture number
seven, number eight, number nine. Then ten, eleven and twelve. And I probably won't
give anywhere near that number of lectures. As a matter of fact, I probably will ask
you if you want some group processing tomorrow night instead of seminar. Well, now
that just shoots the schedule all to pieces. I guess my secretary can just tear up the rest
of those notes.
I want to talk to you about a very formidable subject though, under the heading of
lecture number three. A very formidable subject, one which nobody in the United
States has dare approach for a very very long time. And all the better auditors did it.
And all the poorer ones didn't. But the nation as a whole would rather not.
This subject is practically unmentionable. It has a lot to do with babies. Has a lot to
do with anything. As a matter of fact, the words I am about to give you now would
probably never be used in a drawing room. The material which I am about to give you
has not even been discussed as itself between married couples.
Now Freud, Freud in 1894 broke with Breuer who taught him to psycho-analyze, and
announced the libido theory, a three-letter word adding up to sex. And Freud brought
sex, they said ... they used to say out of the bedroom into the parlor. That was his
contribution to humanity. But what I'm talking about has never even gotten to the
bedroom.
This subject has been known to make strong women quail and men weep. It's proba-
bly the most controversial as well as the least mentioned subject today in America. I'm
sorry I have to go into it at this time but I do. It's for your own good!
The subject is control.
You haven't looked at that yet. What I've just said about control is totally true. If I
told you bluntly that the mission of a Scientologist was to control within an inch of
his life, everything in his vicinity. you'd say zzzzzr, it's not for me. People would run,
shedding their coats and hats rather than to come to you for processing. Control
what? „You mean this fellow’s going to sit there and control me? Ohhhhh. No, no.“
Child-ha-psychology - new way of pronouncing the word. By the way, it's being pro-
nounced that way more or less uniformly throughout the world today. Child-ha-
psychology. You didn't think I could do it again, did you?
It has given America a vast gift - for which they all ought to be shot! That is, „a child
must learn how to express himself and must never be interfered with at all times by nobody no place,
and should just go on and on and on and on.“
You go to call on somebody in America - just shows you this deadly virus - you know
the deadly virus that was just imported by the Public Health Service from China.
Yeah, they assured everybody they weren't going to let it in and then they took a boat-
load of sick people and unloaded them into California and they've now got it down
there. Anyhow, all of this deadly virus has reached deeply into the American home.
You go to call on the average American family. Wonderful. You sit down. You do one
of two things: you either fight junior off all night or you look at a TV program that
you always avoid at home. It has become one of the favorite indoor sports of America
to fight off the children before they fight your head off.
Now, one of the interesting things about it is it will undoubtedly result in tremendous
cultural advances. Very certain it is that yon, in future years, would be able to be heard
in the middle of a roaring crowd if you whispered, so great has been your practice of
trying to talk across the top of your neighbor's children while you were calling.
Now, let's agree that they overdid it in the old days, but I don't think they knew any-
thing about it to overdo it. What is it? Control. In other words, we have a whole cult -
I hate to refer to psychology as a cult because it's reactive. It is a cult, definitely
though. It's a German cult. They have various other kinds of cults in Germany. They
had the Jungvolk and the Volkswagen and they had all kinds of... all kinds of cults in
Germany and one of them was psychology. Psycholocult they call it over there. And
they imported it over here. But it's got this factor of they're all animals anyhow and
there's nothing you can do about it so why try. And that's psychology. That's child
psychology in particular.
But I'm not talking today about children. I'm merely talking about this deadly virus
„don't control anybody“ sort of a philosophy which has swept the length and breadth of
the land. America is losing on the international front simply because she nationally is
unwilling to control anything. And she's going to get bit!
They hired me - They wrote me a letter and hired me, especially here a few years ago,
to go out and shoot Japs to make them more amenable to democracy. They hired
some of you too. They paid us money to go out and do this.
Now they back out and they say, „Well, you boys do as you please. Uhhuh, nothing to it. Go
on, trade with the Red side. Do whatever you please, and so on.“ Blaah.
Japan had methods of controlling its populace. It had an organizational structure
there, a social structure. It was very interesting. Women had a role, men had a role
and so forth. Well they just shot that to ribbons. Women are all free and the men are
all free and everybody's all free and they've got a constitution they can't even read.
And then we say „All right, now, there you are. Go ahead. Go ahead.“
And I'll bet you that some politician in a few years gets terribly surprised when it goes
boom! And they say „What happened? Why those nasty people.“ No, it meant that there
were existing methods of control of that particular culture; it meant they were
chopped to pieces: no other control level was substituted in, and then they went off
and abandoned it.
Now, my point here is not international relations. I couldn't care less because you
could always ask the question of international relations is, what relations? There aren't
any That's the trouble with international relations, a camouflaged hole. Everybody
talks about our international relations. You mean our International inability to com-
municate? International relations was that psychosis which grew out of the fact that
most other nations speak different languages.
All right. But we are very allergic here in America to this idea of control. Very allergic.
After the war they were talking about sergeants had to have a big brother attitude to-
everything wrong with armies but armies do run according to certain rules, so that
makes them armies, you know?
I well remember when Christianity hit the Roman army. . . Belonged to the tenth-
seventh legion at the time. Oh, that's on the backtrack. And they got so bad, that they
were so out of control that they wouldn't even wear armor into battle - the Roman
army after a while. And they either would run away or simply stand there and say,
„Kill me, I wish to be a martyr to the cause,“ And that was the end of Rome.
Well, if you depend on some channel of control, you don't reinforce it, don't take care
of it, why, don't worry or don't wonder, please don't be surprised if everything goes to
the devil suddenly. I mean if there is a set of control factors and you cease to exert
them without substituting anything else for them, why be surprised if the thing blows
up. You understand?
Control is a dirty word...much dirtier word than sex. Marriage couples fence without
ever using the word, really. They fence on this subject all the time when they're having
a bad time. And it merely comes down...the item boils down to this: You're not sup-
posed to control me. I am supposed to control you and on the other side, you're not
supposed to control me. I'm supposed to control you. And this argument can go on
for years and years because it happens to be two opposed viewpoints.
Usually never occurs to such a couple that as long as she can't control herself, he'll
have to try to control her and as long as he can't control himself, she'll have to try to
control him. And they're gonna get awful busy with control the more they chop out
each others controls. And if they just reduce each others' controls to zero, we have
the standard American home.
Now, you say, „These are very interesting words you were saying, Ron. These words are pretty dy-
namite. It's really not safe to talk about this dirty word 'control' right out in front of public...tsk. It's
not safe.“ Well, I pay you the honor of not being public. I wouldn't swear at you.
Now, let's take a look at this. Let's take a look at this. What do we mean by control?
Well, to most people it means, „I will beat you until you do as I say.“ That's control. Well,
the funny part of it is that isn't control at all. „I will threaten you until you comply.“ That
isn't control.
If there is anything new under the sun, it is Scientology's new understanding of posi-
tive postulation. All control is is positive direction. And when it gets mixed up with „I
will beat you unless you obey the postulate. I will kick you, fine you, jail you unless you obey what I
have said.“ When it gets down to that, control has already long since disappeared.
All these laws which carry with them a penalty are assuming that the government is
no longer in control of the people. And that's an interesting observation because con-
trol, we discovered, cannot carry with it duress or punishment and still be control.
Aaah... but you say... and here's the weak one. The do-gooders down the years say,
„Well, we mustn't punish anybody, we mustn't duress anybody, we mustn't command anybody, we
mustn't control...“ No! Those things don't follow. We shouldn't punish people' is not
consecutive to 'we shouldn't control anybody', but usually is.
What do we mean by this? We have discovered a zone, an area of control and direc-
tion which we call Tone 40, which means positive direction with total intention, con-
siderations, Start, Change, and Stop. We found out the reason people hate control -
it's become a dirty word - is because nobody can. They say, „If you don't do so and so I'm
gonna hit you in the jaw.“ That's control, though. That isn't control. That's a „Because I
can't control you I gotta hit you in the jaw because I don't want you, because I can't control you.“
See, see how that works out?
Actually, I tell you, when control starts hitting a dwindling spiral in a government, you
get a very interesting state of affairs in a government. Somebody was talking to me
about this the other day. I'll just mention it to you - brought this up. You get the gov-
ernment using duress to enforce compliance. Now the only people who disobey in a
government are those who can't take orders. So the reason the government issues or-
ders and punishments is so the people who can take orders .... Now wait a minute let's
look at this again. All these speed laws and everything like that are put out so as to get
the people who can't take orders to... now just a minute. If they can't take orders and
directions, doesn't matter how many laws or how many threats are made, they'll never
hear about them. Doesn't matter how often they're jailed - they'll never reform. And
we get the enigma of our present criminal system. It is a criminal system.
Now, people who can take orders, read the law and they say, „Well, I'm not supposed
to...“ They read the law and they look it over and they say, „Well, all right, go along with it.
Reasonable law, reasonable law“, and so on. Of course, if they put a four-pass highway
down with no curves on it and say ten miles an hour is the speed limit. This is already
a sort of a stupidity that would rather disgrace the idea of control because it doesn't
make good sense. So, the order of direction connected with it doesn't make good
sense and that's invalidative too.
But these people that cause accidents and these people that have a rough time, are the
people who run through the stop lights because they can't read them. Well, isn't that
fascinating! You mean to say, all these duresses and laws and legislation and every-
thing else are being launched to inhibit a group of people who cannot receive an order
or direction and wouldn't read them anyhow. So we get the dwindling spiral of the
general populace being victimized by an errant government that cannot cope with its
inability to control its population in all strata. The dwindling spiral of government is
simply the failure of a government to control its population. And it signifies its inabil-
ity to the degree that it threatens and gives duress. Promises duress unless... And you
get this fascinating ...well, you get penal systems and you get reformatories and you
get laws and you get courts and you get jurisprudence and so on. Boy! There are noth-
ing but vias on a control line, let me assure you. Because if you really knew what con-
trol was, you would not try to beat to pieces your havingness. You see that?
I mean, a government says, „Well, we're gonna execute you“, they say to this fellow be-
cause, why, „well, we couldn't control you.“ „Gonna execute you because we couldn't control you.“
And the government is minus, at that moment, one person. They just shoot the hav-
ingness to pieces this way, don't they? It's rather silly. You say, „Well, if we didn't have
restraints of this character - man being a beast and being naturally an anti-social animal 'cause just a
little old baby, they bite - and man being an anti-social brute, beast, dog... wooff... we have to use the
switch or a k- rock and the more we beat him, the more social he becomes.“ Yet the very people
who do that - say, the more we beat him, the more social he becomes, if they went
down to a prison they would find the people in it were the people who had been
beaten. Can it be these guys themselves are kind of nuts? Can it be nobody's been
thinking about this for an awfully long while? Can it be man was totally ignorant of
this whole thing. Well, let's get on with this idea of control.
You try to sell somebody on the idea of control and he's liable to flinch. He's liable to
flinch for this reason: He doesn't know what you're talking about, the word has been
totally misused, disabused; he hasn't a clue. But here is a way to explain it which is
quite interesting.
You ask him, „Have you ever been controlled by somebody?“
I ask you - have you over been controlled by somebody? Didn't like it, did you? Well,
how would you like to de-control that area of your life? How would you like to pull
out those old bad 8-Cs that have been run on you, and re-control that area of your life
yourself? You'd buy that, wouldn't you?
In other words, if you had a father that ran very bad 8-C, something like that, or ran
none at all, which is worse. And he left a whole area of your life completely littered up
with this sort of thing. Yes, that's an area of control isn't it? Well, you'd love to de-
control that, knock it out, knock it flat; and substitute your own control in that par-
ticular area. That would be a very good thing to do.
Well, you could explain it to people like that and they'd have a little more idea what
you're talking about. But it's control to them and it would still he bad. All control is, in
essence, is positive direction. And the only way you can have positive direction is
when it is on the basis of an optimum solution.
The optimum solution stems from the eight dynamics. The eight dynamics you know
well. Now, an optimum solution is the greatest good for the greatest number of dy-
namics. What do we mean by „good“? Substitute „survival“ and you've got it. The most
survival for the most dynamics is the best solution always. And as long as positive di-
rection is leveled on this that we call the optimum solution, it is very acceptable direc-
tion. Isn't it? Very acceptable. We tell somebody - no matter how practiced we are,
with controlling bodies and so forth - we say to somebody; „Jump over that cliff.“
He goes and jumps over the cliff and he hits the bottom of it and he's dead. He gets
another body and somebody says, „Jump over that cliff“.
And he says, „To hell with you.“ Isn't that the way it works?
So that commands or postulates which do not forward an optimum solution - the
greatest amount of survival on the most dynamics - are bad commands. And that
would then be bad control. And you might get the intention through the first few
times, but after a while people would say, „Na-ah.“ They would set up a resistance to
direction which could then become so psychotic that they would resist all direction
and you'd have a criminal.
A criminal is simply somebody who resists all direction. What's this make him, by the
way? This makes him totally directed. How do we work that out? Well, that which ye
resist ye connect with. So that we get this idea of positive direction and we find out
that communication goes hand in hand with positive direction and a person to give
commands or to control adequately must himself be capable of receiving a communi-
cation. Quite important.
The old-timers way back when making a big pitch out of this, trying to steer people
into purgatory before their time, always said it another way: „Ye who would learn to com-
mand must first learn to obey. And when we've got you obeying good, we'll tell you to jump over the
nearest cliff.“ See, this is the way it went. If you would command things, you must first
learn to obey. Nah.. If you're going to command things you'd certainly better be in
communication with them. Did you ever try to drive a car while you were sitting two
or three blocks away, your body, too? You and your body are sitting two or three
blocks away from the car. Well, you don't like cars, so you're going to direct and
command this car. Yet you're not going to go near it, not going to have anything to
do with it, but you're going to command it. Oh, no. See, that just doesn't work. You
have to be in communication with that which you would command.
Now, here's what's interesting too. You mustn't be flinching from commands it gives
you, see. Automobile commands you to turn it back on the road. See, very simple
method of control.
By the way, there was a fellow or two, several of them, all Scientologists, who have
been driving lately - the only people in the world who have been driving lately. The
other people have been driven. People sit behind the power steering wheel with
power brakes with power motors with power navigators with gimmicks that follow
the white line, providing it doesn't turn black, and the car takes them down the road,
you know. They're not there -... you know.
„What's this thing?“ Crash! They say, „I didn't disobey any law. I was driving my Cadillac at ten
miles an hour right down the middle of the road just where I should have belonged. I was not near
either ditch. I was obeying all the laws, ten miles an hour and somebody came right down the freeway
going sixty and hit me square...“ Well, this fellow that was driving this Cadillac - I don't
know why it is all Cadillacs have to go ten miles an hour. And all cheap cars have to
go seventy-nine. Cadillacs can go seventy-nine. The cheap cars can go ten.
Now, this fellow told a lie. He said. „I was driving down the road at ten miles an hour.“ No,
he wasn't. Even though he was sitting behind the wheel, even though he had a driver's
license in his pocket, which I think they have slot machines now in almost any station
or so forth. You put a dime in you get a driver's license out. You see, if they issued
these things and they were really valid licenses, and they really did enfranchise people
who could drive to drive, they would be exerting control on the populace and we
mustn't have that.
No, fellow had his driver's license in his pocket and he was sitting behind the wheel of
the car and everything looked just as though, just as though he was controlling an
automobile. Let me assure you that the bulk of accidents occur when the automobile
is controlling the driver. He was being driven down the road by a car: and because he
sort of has some trained responses that he picked up years ago that other cars are go-
ing along and he can duplicate those.
It's quite amazing this duplication of the other car as a method of driving. The other
car's driving in the lane, so the fellow drives his car in the lane. You see, his car fol-
lows the other car because the other car, you know, the machinery is driving. It's very
interesting. Very interesting to watch. Fellow crosses over the white line accidentally,
see, crosses over the white line. It's quite interesting to notice that the two or three
cars behind him will also make the same mistake.
And when they put up these white crosses alongside of highways to show people who
got killed there, the white crosses multiply at that particular spot. They say there's
where a car killed a man. So the car sees the white cross and kills another man. What
I'm telling you is true - these white crosses always multiply.
Now, this is a case of something controlling a person. Now, if he's totally unwilling to
be controlled by a car, he can't drive it at all. If he's only willing to super-control a car
and the car could never control him, this is kind of weird. It's also an unworkable
situation because the car could be going off the side of the road and he would not
notice it was taking him off the side of the road. So he wouldn't do anything about it
because he was unwilling to be controlled by the car and we have an accident. Just as
the person who is not controlling the car at all would have an accident. You see how
these things go together?
All right! We look this over and we find out then that a control is a somewhat give
and take proposition. A person who accepts control, who can accept control, who can
accept communication, who can accept postulate direction is the same person who
can direct because the channels are open out if they're open in. It's just as true as this.
Now, it's true enough that a person can go on controlling things after he becomes
slightly unwilling to be controlled. He can go on almost controlling things after he
becomes very unwilling to be controlled. He can put up a show. He can put the Cadil-
lac in the middle of the road so that it is driving him down the middle of the road,
and he says, „I'm controlling this Cadillac.“ It's a very interesting thing.
Show you what...I'm not talking about cars but it's quite amusing if you want to vary
your driving. One if you want to kill yourself, try to drive totally in present time with
each action totally independent right then, recognized as necessary right then, done
right then, and on no automatic action at all - no machinery at all. You'll just do every-
thing there is to be done at the moment you do it. It's quite amazing. It almost kills
you for the first few hundred miles. And after a while you really start driving a car.
The point is that you have to have an intention to take the car down the road. And it's
a very weird thing that you can just teach somebody to do this and as long as he can
get away with it without a ridge kicking his teeth in, why, he has a ball. You say, „Now
why don't you... YOU take this car down to that next turn, and then YOU take this car around
that turn, and then YOU take this car up that next strait-a-way.“ You get some old knocked
down, knocked to pieces Chevrolet and it starts flying like a bird. It's quite fantastic.
He starts taking the car down the road, you know. It's quite interesting. He has an in-
tention to put it up the next mile. Drivers who have accidents, have only this much
acquaintance with intention. The intention's built in on the assembly line by Henry
Ford. Later manufacturers have not built in any intention.
What is this intention? What is this control and so on? What is this positive direction
and so on? Well, it's just all the same breed of cat. You say to that speaker over there,
you say, „Stay there“, you know. Hmm! Well, you could say that and you sometimes
find somebody does that. There are people around, who, if you ask them to tell that
speaker to stay there, right in that position, would say, „Oh, why should I do that. It's al-
ready there in that position, you know. Why should I tell it to stay there because it's already there.
Everything is already there. Life is prepared for me this way and I just sort of go through it, you see.
That's the way life is.“
Now here's the funny one. You ask that person if he enjoyed the music that has just
come out of the speaker and he will either say, „Huhah“, or, „What music?“ If he can't
get the idea of placing it, controlling it, doing something with it, then he's not going to
get anything back from it. You get that? I mean, that's the way it is.
Now, you take the control of a body - here's a vast subject. But if you realize that I
just showed you a thetan... all right now, a body in most cases is busily controlling the
thetan. Well, there's nothing wrong with this as long as the thetan knows he's there
and knows it. But when it becomes totally unconscious and he's not there at all, every-
thing becomes wrong with it.
You walk down the street - well, to some degree you're being in controlled by a body,
but to this degree you certainly are. There's a path through the woods. The body has
to travel on that path because it gets scratched and muddied and it gets dirtied up,
why you don't send up around through the swamp or the trees. You see what you do?
You send it up the path. Got that? Well, you are controlled to the degree that bodies
cannot go easily without paths. So you say, „Well, then the path is controlling the body too.“
That's right! But if you at the far receiving end of all this are totally allergic to control,
you probably make the body walk off the path, or into the trees, or drown in the
swamp before you will listen to a body controlling you to that degree.
So, to some degree a body controls the thetan. Well, when a person refuses absolutely
to be controlled by his body, when a thetan refuses completely to be controlled by his
body anymore and so on. Why, he doesn't control his body any more and he himself
just goes into sub-zero and that's that. After that bodies walk around and join the
army and run for Congress. They do all sorts of things. Such a person becomes what
an old time Scientologist calls an operating GE... Body being a Genetic Entity.
Well, here's an interesting condition of affairs. Who's going to control this body
unless there's somebody there to control it. You say, „Well, if Poppa and Mama lay in
enough machinery ...” this is really what the society sometimes tries to do. If they just lay
in enough machinery and get enough continued conditioned responses - Pavlavian -
Pavlavian child-raising approved by the American psychological association. Ahh...
we're gonna sue 'em for that some day, by the way. Make 'em give up the use of the
word- it's fraudulent. Two fraudulent things. Psychology says -- Psyche -- ology, see.
It's the study of the psyche which is the soul or spirit. Well, all you'd have to do is get
them to admit it wasn't and they'd have to give up the use of the word. It's fraud -
public fraud. And...you think a fellow couldn't sue on that basis and win but as a mat-
ter of fact, we probably could.
Here's this fascinating condition of this fellow totally conditioned into the idea that
his boss and his mama and his papa and his schoolmaster and so forth are responsible
for those control factors which he experiences. He goes through life like an automa-
ton. Well listen, papa isn't there and papa didn't lay in enough sensible machinery to
control him through every existing situation he will ever meet. And mama isn't there
any more. And mama won't control this person through every existing situation this
person will meet. And the headmaster isn't there any more. And this headmaster isn't
going to control this person through every situation this person's gonna meet... till we
get an average citizen. Bitter, bitter truth!
If you take a large strata of men and try to sort out of them somebody who actually
effectively can do something about something. See, they're all doing what somebody
else .. you know, who isn't there any more control... it just doesn't make sense any
more, you see. These people do all sort of things. I see this happening - tried to teach
somebody to add up a column of figures in some different way than they were taught.
Well, I was actually trying to teach the head of the accounting school the person had
attended, see, because the person wasn't there any more to be taught. Quite amusing.
And listen, even if he were there, the head of that accounting school probably could
not have been taught very much about accounting. Don't you see? He would have
said, „I know the subject, I learned it from my master.“ Well, that's fine. So, then you would
have had to, when you were teaching him, actually teach the person who had taught
him. You see where we're going? We're going in the direction of nobody there, total
unresponsibility, control being done by tradition and perdition.
And this is the way it would look. This is what would happen to people and what
happens to people who just abandon the whole idea of controlling anything, of direct-
ing anything, of doing anything. I don't know, they're kind of - life is a sort of a chute
and somebody dumped them onto the top of it and they go down the chute. Get to
the end of it; somebody buries them. Some where on the chute they might have
awakened for a moment but the probability is, is they never found out. It would be a
funny day - some people alive today would find out they were on that chute or alive,
And you can do this as a Scientologist. It's very, very amusing.
You can take acknowledgment all by itself and you can start working on the Effect
Scale, a new scale I'll have to tell you about later on in the congress. You tell some-
body, „Good. Good. Fine. Good.“ Just stand in front of them, you know, and you say,
„Good. Fine. Okay. All right. Okay. Thank you. Good. Good. All right. Good! Fine. Thank you.
Good.“ And all of a sudden the follow will say --- or just break out and cry horribly
large tears. „Say, you know, I've never ... never been spoken to before.“
Now you don't see this happening much in Scientology because Scientology people -
for the good reason, not that they’ve been educated in this at all, but because. they
had to have some quiver of' life in them to walk into this subject.
But you take somebody who's just plowing around on total automatic: well, you start
this with them, why you .. you'll have given them a point on the chute when they
found out they were on it. Most of the time they didn't want to know.
All right. What does this add up to then in terms of control? Control is a dirty word, a
thoroughly dirty word because it's been thoroughly dirtied. When I say they have a
pitch, they had a curve when they gave out the information; they twisted it, they per-
verted it - the information that was discovered in past ages about the mind - and so
on - to use it for a control factor. Well, I'm merely saying that somebody violated an
optimum solution. In other words, they tried to control people to their detriment.
They tried to push them around and eventually they forgot that control was Tone 40,
always, and they came down scale to where control was the exact meaning of punish-
ment. Control and punishment became the same thing because when these people
controlled something they did so with the end view of hurting; the end view of pun-
ishing or upsetting or spoiling an organism. And finally postulates themselves and
positive direction itself became itself, nothing more nor less, nothing more nor less
than punishment.
So man has drifted away from control. But it's a dangerous thing to drift away from I
assure you.
[The old reel ends at this point, the remainder is from the clearsound version only.]
Very interesting. If you don't want to live, why. don't control anything. If you don't
want to be controlled by anything at all, why, go to another universe. If you don't
want to be controlled against your will - which is to say against your best interests - by
something else, then you had better learn control well enough and learn to control
well enough that you can consciously and knowingly accept or reject whatever control
comes your way. And that requires that you be in pretty darn good shape. You see
how that would work out?
There isn't any avoiding this. You can't drop out of the game. You could possibly rise
out of the game, but you couldn't drop out of it.
Do you realize the only reason anybody gets an engram in restimulation is he gets his
attention on it. Well what is that engram doing to his attention? What is that picture
of that cat doing to his attention, huh? It's got it. Picture goes here; his attention goes
here. Here he is. He's perfectly free of the picture of a cat. What's controlling his at-
tention? A picture of a cat.
Well, how come a picture of a cat could this irrationally control his attention? It's be-
cause he doesn't want to be controlled by cats. Believe it or not, that's the reason why
his attention is fixed on it. He's got it there so it won't control him. And then he says,
„I don't know anything about it and I've forgotten all about it,“ so he won't know that he's got
it there so it won't control him. And he forgets about it so that lie won't notice or be
bothered by the fact that it totally controls his working, sleeping hours.
You see this? It's very logical isn't it? Isn't that logical? If we just keep it there it won't
get around to where it controls us. Total resistance, you see. It's the resistance that
keeps it there. So what does a body do to a thetan? To a marked degree it controls
him. What does an engram bank do to a thetan? What does a reactive mind do to a
thetan? Controls him! Well, let me assure you that until he finds out that it's possible
for him to accept control, he will continue to keep the picture of the cat there and the
body there so that they won't control him. Silliest thing you ever heard of, but that's
the way it is.
You show him that by control he will not be annihilated; that he can accept a positive
control without dying at once And he says, „What do you know? This fellow's been control-
ling me for forty-five minutes and I'm still here.“ And reverse-wise, he then finds out with
further processing that he can control something else - himself. And these factors,
one against the other worked in a processing session, bring a person up to a point
where he is not totally resistant to control, and where he is not totally obsessed with
controlling, and the end product is that he can control something.
He starts taking the automobile down the road by intention. He starts talking it over
with his wife rather than worrying about whether or not she's controlling him. Funny
part of it is he starts controlling her. But he could only start controlling her at the
moment that he gets slightly willing to be controlled by her. And that unfortunately is
the catch in the whole thing.
We have answered the question: What is good auditing presence and what is good
auditing address to the situation, when we say the auditor must exert positive direc-
tion which must not be thrown aside by every circuit which jumps up in its way. In
other words, the auditor simply works to get through the idea to the preclear that
these controls and so on, aren't going to kill him. The moment the preclear's bank
moves in the road of it, circuits move up, service facsimile moves in, everything else.
And the auditor keeps right on and the service facsimile blows up, the bank blows up.
It's very interesting. Fantastic.
What is a service facsimile but an old tired mechanism with which to control people?
And what kind of a way of controlling people is it to lie down and be three-quarters
dead. This controls people? No. I tried it once. I tried it once. I was lying down and I
said, „Now I will be three-quarters dead, and everybody therefore will jump across the desk,“ see.
And they didn't. They didn't. They stood around. They gave me some attention, but
they certainly weren't under control. So I think this is kind of an aberrated mecha-
nism. I don't recommend it.
But the service facsimile is used as a control mechanism when the person can no
longer control things. So therefore, every sick person is a person who is no longer
able to control his environment or the people in it. It is only necessary to give him a
certainty on his ability to do so once again for him to become well. This, amongst
other things, is the secret of psychosomatic medicine. But it isn't that we don't prac-
tice psychosomatic medicine, we just make people well.
Here is one of these things that came up, and became very important, is very impor-
tant, will continue to be very important and that is this factor which we will have to
call, just to convey some vague meaning of what we're talking about - control. We
actually don't mean control the way people mean control at all. We mean a new thing
- which means a positive direction, in present time, from one being to another, with
the end view of matching up to the optimum solution. The greatest good for the
greatest number of dynamics. And positive intention, optimum solution, positive di-
rection and wonders are worked. All a magnetic personality is, unless it's somebody
who's had a magnet installed by a psychiatrist, would be somebody who could per-
vade an environment with an intention. That would be all there is to personal magnet-
ism. He could pervade an environment with an intention. It's as easy as that. Not an
intention for yesterday, but an intention for right now.
You understand this a little better now?
Audience: Yes.
Well, you'll be hearing a lot about it. I hope you do. I'll see you all tomorrow at one
o'clock.
Thank you.
[End of lecture]

[[Category:Lectures FC]]