View source for How Not to Get Results (4ACC 540326)

'''Series:''' 4th Advanced Clinical Course (4ACC)

'''Date:''' 26 March 1954

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

----

← [[Lecture_Index_4ACC|Back to Series]]

Okay. This is the 26th of March, 1954. The last lecture of the 4th Unit, Phoenix.

I want to talk to you about ways to keep from getting results. That's so that you'll have both sides of the picture. I talk to you all the time about how to get results and so forth, and of course this leaves a complete vacuum on how not to get results. And I think that it's probably very bad of me to talk to you about this just before you shove off, because undoubtedly, undoubtedly some of the material which I'm going to cover right now has been covered in the auditing room. So let's just start in with the process we use and go over how not to get results with what we're doing.

Now, it's easy to do this, actually. You'd be surprised. I keep telling people that it's very easy to process and so forth, but I'm always assuming—I'm going from the unreasonable assumption, you could say, that we want to make somebody better and so forth, and all is sweetness and light and that the processes are going to be used right.

Now, it's absolutely true, it's absolutely true that if you take what you've got right this moment and use it, just like that, just like it was written up on that mimeo sheet: you got some Opening Procedure SOP 8-C, Step I; handling the present time problem if it suddenly appears; using some Beingness and Universe Processing; doing some Exteriorization-Interiorization (which, by the way, is missing on that sheet); and handling the Grand Tour and some Change of Space (not necessarily on Change of Space in the MEST universe, Change of Space in childhood home, so forth)—with an eye alert to the fact that the havingness of the preclear is liable to go by the boards while you're doing some of these things, so that you have to snap in some masses on him and so on. Well, keeping this in mind, those processes, as you have been given them, worked.

If you're to handle a psychotic, you just cut in at the line of mimicry. Catatonic schiz—lie down on the next bed until they finally get suspicious of you. Might take a long time. Might have to do it for a week, but they finally would. Or put a dummy in the next bed. And there are some other mechanical methods of handling psychos that I've been working on here for some time. And I know that when we finally get through the woods with these things, it'll make the auditing of psychos, as such, unnecessary. So I'm asking you, please just leave it alone. It will be solved in the next four or five years; that's plenty of time for psychos.

Well, it might very well ruin an auditor's career to handle a psycho. You know that? You know that you can audit somebody in some neighborhood and they've had eighteen electric shocks and so on. You didn't know anything about this at all, you didn't bother to inquire. And they looked pretty wild-eyed to you and you went on and you audited them. And they screamed like mad and the next thing you know they ran down—and running wild around the place. And the police picked them up and they want to know where you're doing this and that. And then the relatives find out—they've beaten the person three or four times since you last saw them and the relatives want to know why the case is worse by your auditing. And, oh, it just goes on and on and on. I mean, you can just get so damn tired of the whole subject of human aberration by auditing one psycho that . Skip it! If there are mechanical methods in view, let's just bet on the mechanical methods and leave it alone. All right. You still could handle that on the basis of that.

Well, we'll take up the case level that you would handle. You, very often, get a neurotic case level. The way to enter a neurotic case level—the simplest, easiest way to enter one—is next-to-the-last list in Self Analysis. Honest to Pete, that is.

Now, the way not to audit one is to run some engrams, do some heavy processing, don't get them exteriorized, do some Change of Space on them while they're still inside, so forth. And then about forty-five minutes after you've started the session, having done all this, give it up. I mean, you've finished the guy right there.

Now the main thing that you're interested in, however, is just get him into communication with some part of his thinkingness and beingness and so forth. And the easiest way to do that is the next-to-the-last list in Self Analysis. And uniformly, every time I pick up somebody who has been around for some time—every time I pick up somebody who has been around for some time as a preclear, that hasn't gone up the line, that isn't getting better, showing any improvement, some auditor's preclear—l start to run this next-to-the-last list in Self Analysis and the preclear has never had it run on him before. Now, I don't know what the aversion there is to this next-to-the-last list, but it happens to be the difference between upper-level psychosis and neurosis. It'll actually snap a guy into a neurosis. There is where it really functions. And it'll bring a guy in neurosis up to a considerably higher level. Your preclear starts to get frantic, anxious, something like that—Self Analysis, next-to-the-last list, you can do it. Well, you've got those processes. All right.

You've also got emergency processes. A fellow gets a burned hand: Have him mock-up an acceptable hand. Lots of them. Shove them in. Lots of them. Lots more. Very funny thing, a guy can't get any mock-ups sometime, he's got an infected leg, you can't get any mock-ups. He can't see anything.

He says, "I've told you this consistently."

You say, "Can you get the whole front yard full of decayed legs?"

Yeah, he can. First time he ever got a mock-up. His acceptance level is a leg, that's why he burned his leg. You could just assume that was the case and it would probably be true. Well, anyway, you could remedy his havingness in the form of that leg.

Or you could say, "Give me some places where that leg is safe" or "...that burned hand is safe." (Never "not safe.") "Give me some places where it's safe." "Some more places where it's safe." "Some more places where it's safe." "Some more places where it's safe." And you'll see the burn go away. And one of the faster ways to make it go away—because it is a body and the body does depend on havingness—is to remedy the havingness of it. You know, mock-up arms, so forth, and push them in. You finally get him to mocking-up radioactive, solid arms made out of uranium or something like that, and moving them in, it works much faster. Just a quantity of mass.

Okay. So you got an emergency, you got an assist. Of course anything can be an assist. A fellow is knocked halfway out, you can ask him to remember something real. And he all of a sudden turns up.

Had a preclear one day that all of a sudden started spinning on me. Couldn't imagine what was wrong with this preclear. Preclear had been going along all right. And reported at the beginning of his session, he was spinning, that was all there was to it, he was psychotic. Had a communication lag, maybe up to about twenty seconds, if—if he replied at all. Okay. What did I do with this fellow? This fellow obviously—he'd been running better processes and so forth. I didn't have any idea what had happened to him, neither did he, he couldn't get into communication enough to tell me. So I asked him—just treated him for his temporary tone level. Remember that as a trick: temporary tone level. Ask him to remember something real, a time he was in communication, ask him to recall a time when he had felt some affinity for somebody. You see, you're giving him havingness by giving him pieces of his past. You're giving him some certainty by the fact that he has been someplace, at least.

All right, I asked him this. And you know what happened? He went home, and camped on his front doorstep was a service buddy who was one foot ahead of the cops. And he had spent about half of the night trying to get this guy out of trouble, only to have the guy turn down all of his solutions and turn right around and walk straight into the arms of the cops, see. Just bing-boom! I mean, just a complete loss, upset and so on. And this nervous, frantic character that he ran into had just unsettled him.

Well, you could say, unsettled him—he shouldn't, if he'd been audited he shouldn't be in that kind of a condition. Yeah! "Remember something real to you." "A time when you were in communication." Ask him questions like that—about six, eight questions, just no more than that, just something real, communication, so on. All of a sudden he says, "It's a funny thing," he says, "I'd completely forgotten about this." He said, "I was arrested while I was in prep school for some money missing. And they arrested me and held me all night at the station. They grilled me. Whew!" He says, "Yeah! Yeah, I just thought of that. That's a funny thing, I'd forgotten about that completely and, say, you know, I was sick at the time. I had the flu." (What a nice engram, see!) And he says, "And you know what happened to me last night?" What do you know, it just came into view. He had had such a deep anaten, there, in prep school during all this, that had gone out of sight. So when his buddy came up late at night and so forth and sprung all this on him, it simply submerged right along with the other and you simply have a burdened engram sitting there, gone into full restimulation. Now, given another twenty-four hours, thirty-six hours, forty-eight hours, something like that, it would have dwindled on out. See, it would have been less acute and the boy would have been all right. But we wanted to get some auditing done, so it wasn't all right for him to be in a psychotic, twenty-second-communication-lag state, Temporary, you see.

Well, I fed him a technique to match his tone level. And, really, it's about all the technique you need to match somebody's tone level: next-to-the-last list or "Some places where you're not." "Holding the two back anchor points of the room" you'll occasionally find is far too tough for such a case. And "Putting nothingness in the walls" or something would probably spin the case, just like that, because he was cutting down—he knows he has to have and you're cutting down his havingness.

All right. Let's just take this series of techniques, then, with the reservations that I've just given you—you have remedying havingness for an assist, the next-to-the-last list and then let's just take this little process—starts with Opening Procedure. How would you do Opening Procedure good and wrong?

Well, about the best way you could do it is when the preclear was coming in, you'd say to the preclear, "All right, now go over and put your finger in the middle of the table."

And he says, 'What do you... what do you mean? Why should I do that?" And you say, "Well, it's a system we have."

And he says, "Well, this is SOP 8. I know. I've read some Scientology. And that's a psychotic technique that you're trying to use."

And you say, "No. This happens to be Opening Procedure. I do this on all the patients." Now, you know, you're being very reasonable. "Now, take your hand and put it over there on the wall." What's wrong?

Audience: [various responses]

An unexecuted command! You might as well have told him in so many words, "Look, you don't have to do what I say. It's all right with me, do what you please." And he'll follow that pattern with you in auditing,

Another thing was, if you said "over on the wall" and the wall was further away than the table: Why did he talk to you? Well, it probably was the table is too far to reach.

And you give him the wall or something like that, that's even further, that becomes more impossible. Well, you would have missed the boat in the first place. Quite commonly and somebody comes in I have any doubts of at all, I say, "Now all right, how about reaching the corner of your chair. Now let go of it." And you know, it doesn't require very much, because he only had to move his hand five inches to get it to the corner of the chair. Have any doubt about this fellow, reach little distances. Start Opening Procedure with little distances.

Now, you could start Opening Procedure with great big strides—that just wouldn't work at all.

Another way you could do it is, after you've told him, "Lay your finger on the center of the table." He goes over and plops his whole hand onto the center of the table.

And then you say, "All right. Go over and touch the back of that chair." That, by the way, will spoil your preclear eventually.

You say, "No. Your finger. Index finger." "Oh, oh, oh, oh," he'll say.

Now you say, well, you've made the preclear wrong. No, you haven't made him wrong. You've made it less possible for him to avoid what you're saying. You have convinced him that you're going to survive, whatever else in his bank is going to crash. You see that? His effort of slapping his whole hand on the middle of the table is simply a cover/ method of making nothing out of your order. You'll find out that the more an individual is trying to avoid, why, the less accurate they will be. Even if it's very tough on you to be that persnickety and so forth, it is the precision of Opening Procedure which counts. You could do it sloppjly, on and on and on, sloppily, or let him get away with unexecuted commands and find out that your preclear was not under control.

Well, you'd also find out that after you've run Opening Procedure for a couple of hours in a rather sloppy or slipshod fashion and so forth that your case wasn't any better.

Because you had done it wrong. How could you do it wrong? You would do it imprecisely.

You would do it sloppily. Unexecuted commands you let go by and so on. There's the thing. And now that is a test of you, whereby you, as an auditor, can check your own orders to preclears.

Now, do you know that it's very obvious when you give him an order which he doesn't execute if he is in motion? See, that's real obvious to you. But it's less obvious to you—to him or you and particularly you—when he doesn't execute on a mental command and you don't permit him to. If you said, "Oh, all right... now, let's put your finger on the middle of the door, there. Find a spot in the middle of the door and put your finger on that and pull off of it." Or "Put your palm on it," it's whatever you've said—that's what counts. "Put your palm on the middle of the door. Okay. Now, hold on to it for a moment. Now let go of it."

And if you did that one this way, it would be very obvious to you. You'd say, "Go over to the door... well, go to the door—no, the window. Go over to the window and put your finger on the . . uh—on the... um... Well, that's all right, put your hand on the table." All right, that's quite obvious to you if you're handling the actual form and body. It's less obvious to you when you say, "Well, all right, let's, uh... let's find some places where your mother would be safe. Uh... no, no, no, I mean your father. Well, had a little difficulty with that—well, get your brother. Um... oh, can't do that. Um... well, let's see... uh... let's find some places where you're not."

This is not big obvious motion to you when you're slipping along and skidding on these commands, but it is obvious to the guy's mental machinery. It's so obvious that it stops being precise about obeying commands.

Now, in view of the fact that one of the terrible things in life is having to give orders to things and assuming the responsibility of giving the order, you see that this lays one right square in your lap as an auditor. It makes it tough on you to actually have to give orders and be precise about them being carried out, if you yourself are the least bit leery about orders. It puts you in the position of having to impersonate a martinet or something of the sort, see? It can be real bad. So an individual will avoid giving orders because he wants to avoid the responsibility of getting the preclear in hot water. See, he doesn't want to get the preclear messed up, so he actually will give him orders which will mess him up! And that's by giving orders imprecisely and changing his mind.

Every once in a while you're sitting there, you're a little bit tired, you're bored or something like that, your preclear isn't running well, and you say to the preclear, "All right, let's find some people—no, I mean some animals you're not being." You'll find yourself skidding because you said that. Ah, let's get the machine out that does the correction. You meant to say, "...some people that you're not, at the moment," but you said, "Get some animals you're not, at the moment." You stick with the animals. When you make the bull, carry it off. You give him a wrong command, make him execute it. What you write on the thin membrane of his ears in hearing points, write it. Because your eraser is no good with the preclear.

So you said to him, "All right, now go over to the chandelier and put your—I mean…

You meant the lamp over on the side of the room. The chandelier is ten feet above—the ceiling, ten... And, "Go over to the chandelier and… Go over to the chandelier and put your hand on the center of it." He's got to get a chair. He's maybe got to put the chair on the table. Sit there grandly and watch him do it, just as though you thought of that all the time. That's what's known as "poise." Poise is the ability to know you're dead-wrong and look like you're dead-right!

Now, just this business of the precision of the order gives you a sort of an inexorable beingness, as far as he's concerned. It makes you big and indestructible. You let him make nothing out of anything he wants to—the whole bank, the whole universe. But if you go ahead and let him make nothing out of you as the auditor he won't get any processing done. That's horrible. He simply chooses you out for his randomity and lets it go at that.

These preclears who sit there and insult you all the time while you're auditing them are nuts. What do you do about them? I don't know if you've ever run them or not—probably have. The guy that sits there and tells you, "My, you're a wonderful auditor—you blankety-blank so-and-so. You're no good and et cetera, so on, so on, so on." Well, they've just chosen you as the target. You're the wrong target. So it shows you this boy is capable of the confusion of targets. If he were out hunting and he started to shoot at a deer, he'd probably hit the top of the mountain. If he started to shoot at you, he would probably kill himself a deer. If he started to shoot at the top of the mountain, he'd shoot his hunting partner. He's just scrambled on the subject of targets, which means, itself, that he must not be under [his] own control of his attention, since he came to you for help and immediately started knocking you to pieces. Must be that his attention is out of his control. Must mean he's running on terrific other-determinism. So you treat him on that line, you just treat him on that line. Remember, you probably have to handle very, very light techniques on this boy. Don't get grim, gruesome and bludgeon him around, because he's nuts. He's certainly a neurosis.

If that steps on any toes, I'm sorry. But I don't think it does, because I haven't seen this kind of a reaction around here. I've seen this reaction, really, very seldom, truth be told. But when I've seen it, it's really—it's really magnificent. The guy comes in, he wants to be helped. You're a wonderful auditor and so forth. And he sits down and begins to call you every vile thing under the sun, begins to tell you how you're no good. He starts to enter into a discussion of the fact that he thought of what you're doing years ago and he doesn't use it because it's no good. He just starts rolling on this. Usually, by the way, he'll introduce the phrase, "years ago," "a long time ago" and so forth, into the auditing and so on, into the discussion. He thinks that if he puts up that barrier there, why, this will cause you and invite you to knock it down. Well, the fellow is actually inviting becoming a slave.

If you knew what you were doing and you didn't have any better sense than to want a psycho slave around to polish your boots, why, he would immediately go to work for you without any pay and sleep on the back doorstep. All you'd have to do is hit him a few times and beat him around and so forth and he's happy now. You think this is goofy, don't you?

This is why they use so much brutality in insane asylums, is the psychotics go around all the time begging people to knock their blocks off. They are what you call motivator hungry. And an auditor who's confronted by a motivator-hungry preclear is expected to furnish the motivators. And very often, when a person is only lightly motivator hungry, he'll start in saying, "Well, I don't know whether you gave me that command right or not. What do you mean? Why don't you make your commands clear?" He's motivator hungry. No matter how reasonable this sounds, he's motivator hungry. Get that. Now, if he was real bad off and you were to simply clonk him alongside the head a few times with a club and then make him into a complete automaton and give him some routine job to do, he would go around like a puppy dog and do it. This is certain. (Much better trained than a puppy dog.) This is the end result of slavery. He would also burn down the house some night, if he didn't cut your throat while you were asleep on the mistaken—he never meant to cut your throat, because he loves you dearly—on the mistaken identity, on the mistaken identity he was letting the air out of a tire on the car or something. He's about that confused. But this is motivator hunger.

Now look, let's understand it. Let's not react on a stimulus-response and be unhappy the rest of the day because some preclear did that.

Now, the wrong way to go about this is the preclear says to you, "You gave me that command wrong and you ran it all off wrong and I couldn't have done that anyway and you're driving me half out of my mind with this stuff" and so forth. And you are conscious of the fact that you were trying to do a job of auditing. You really were trying. And you might have made a slip of the tongue or something like that, but certainly not enough to cause all this. Well, the wrong way to handle it is to say to him, "I… I… I… I know that I might have said something wrong, but the truth of the matter is, is you're going to do it right now and it's all right, but you just do what I say, and yak, yak, yak, yak, yak, yak."

The dickens with that, you 've closed terminals with an aberration called motivator hunger. Well, don't close terminals with it.

The guy says, "The idea of giving me a command like that. You know that's too tough for me." or "You know that technique is too light for my level of case... I'm a Tone 18, it says right so on the E-Meter." (When it's not turned on.) "And you're..." It wouldn't matter what he said. It wouldn't matter what he said. The wrong thing to do is to talk about what he's talking about. That's the wrong thing to do. Just skip it. Don't close terminals with it. And if you do this a few times while he objects a few times, the first thing you know he'll just run like a top for you.

Because this is just another method, actually, of making nothing out of you. But the motivation behind the thing is motivator hunger.

The mechanics, the energy mechanics behind it is he has hit too many times in proportion to the number of times he's been hit. He's one of these fellows who has insisted on surviving and knocking off the environment in all directions for many, many, many decades, centuries, so forth. And he's alive, isn't he? So he actually has handed out more than he's taken. It's obvious on the face of it, if he's alive, he's handed out more blows than he's received, so he has a tendency for some motivator hunger. Leaves a vacuum.

Well, motivator hunger is a method of acquiring energy. Now, let's get the best, most up-to-date material on how you remedy overt hunger and motivator hunger, How do you remedy this? Just remedy his havingness. If a preclear starts to pick you apart (sort of on the lines of hopefully, as though you ought to smack him or something of the sort, he actually is inviting something and so forth), that's your cue to remedy his havingness. You may have got him into this mood simply by running out too much energy during the session. He wants some energy. Well, one way to get it is to get kicked in the teeth. So he says to you, "You're no good and you're a bad auditor and so forth and kick me in the teeth." Only he never asks the last phrase. He seems to want punishment, because he keeps asking for it. And yet he expects help from you and he seems to want punishment and the help isn't what... Well, remedy havingness. Now, because you're remedying havingness at any and all times during a case anyhow, it wouldn't be any clue to anybody if you just suddenly up and remedied the havingness at that moment.

Suddenly giving it the type of technique which remedies the motivator hunger is a type of invalidation. He, all of a sudden, seems to want you to bc mean to him, you could ask him, "When is the last time you wanted people to be mean to you?" "Let's run an engram on the subject of somebody hitting you" or "…you hitting somebody else" or so on. Wrong deal. Why? You've just locked terminals on another communication line with the same thing. The thing for you to do is to do the highest level technique, which you know is just simply to remedy the guy's havingness. That's all.

Now, he can only get faint mock-ups and so forth, he can only get faint spheres of things and so on. Well, get the thing he could get most heavily and it'll be something he's having a hard time making nothing of. Something on that order. But get anything he could get a good mock-up of and have him pull them in on himself for a few minutes. This is a good process anytime you're processing a preclear. If in doubt, there's lots of other things you can do besides Opening Procedure. You can remedy havingness.

Let's take some fellow who has been a subway conductor. We're processing him to be a subway conductor. All right and he runs along and he just runs along fine, but he doesn't seem to be in too good a mood or something of this sort all of a sudden. And you don't quite know what to do for him one way or the other, there's some doubt in the air or something. You happen to know that he's been a subway conductor.

You say, "All right, now let's see if we can't get a mock-up of a subway train. Can you do that? All right. Let's get four or five trains. Can you do that? All right, six, eight trains. Can you do that? Pull them in on yourself. All right. Get up more trains and pull them in and more trains and pull them in and more trains and pull them in on yourself and more trains and pull them in on yourself."

"Yeah," he says, "You know, I can get the feel of the subway going... "

You say, "...some more trains and pull them in on yourself and some more trains and pull them in on yourself, some more trains and pull them in on yourself."

Do you know that you could do that for two solid hours and practically run the guy's bank? You talk about automatic processes, boy, we got them!

The wrong thing to do is to lock terminals and talk about what he wants to talk about in terms of motivators. He wants to talk about your auditing; you want to audit, you don't want to talk about your auditing. You either don't audit him or audit him. Don't talk about your auditing or talk about the quality of your auditing to the preclear. Don't discuss it. Be efficient. Be effective.

All right. Preclear bogs, he's starting to dope-off, he's sort of misbehaving in the session, his communication lag is real sour. And you otherwise have been doing everything you know how to do to make him good and happy and so forth and you think you're running the case all right. But the case just seems to misbehave, the communication lag is getting too long and that sort of thing. Well, you've always got that one: remedy havingness. Fellow has been in a communications office, he's used to running code machines, have him get eight code machines and pull them in. It's surprising, he can't get any other mock-up, but he can sure get code machines. Why? He looked at them so darn long and invested them with beingness for so darn long.

Now, anybody that's run machinery or heavy material or something of the sort has got, somewhere around, a terrific deposit of energy. He doesn't even have to create the energy to remedy his havingness. Have him pull in the energy he's already got. You don't have to tell him this, at all. You just say, "Get eight more code machines and pull them in."

There is a process which is an amazing process. It's just a killer. But your communication lag gets better on the preclear and he gets happier about it and things brighten up.

What do you do with the thetan? He seems to be getting disgruntled and slowing down and he gets very unhappy about existence and so on. He probably has gotten down to a point of where he's thinking, "You know, I'm just a thought. That's all I am and that's all." And he's so used to havingness and so forth that he'd rather have something. This thetan, although he's practically a Theta Clear, and you have him going around and so on—and you were doing good auditing, you know that, because you were exteriorizing and interiorizing him out of mountains. And you were just doing fine and he was getting better and better and a lot of stuff was blowing up. And all of a sudden he just kind of looked at you and got kind of slow and decided he just didn't like it so much.

You know that running a guy in and out of a mountain will blow half of a bank? You say, "Go find a mountain someplace. All right. Be inside the mountain. Now be outside it. Now be inside of it and outside of it. Now inside it and outside it. Inside it and outside it." Boom! Well, it uses up a tremendous quantity of energy and the fellow has neglected to manufacture any. He's neglected to mock-up any energy. Well, right at that time you just have him—just simply have him throw up eight anchor points, something of the sort, snap them in on himself and have him do it for two or three minutes. He cheers right up, he feels fine.

It's something on the order of how a car or how a steam engine would begin to sound if it was getting awfully low on coal. This steam engine makes its own coal, but it thinks it has to have the coal to run on the coal.

Now the wrong way to handle it on a dope-off, a sudden slowdown and so forth, the wrong way to handle it would be to let it increase and increase and increase, beyond the time when the technique you're using should have remedied it. In other words, let's say we're using 8-C, Step I, and this guy is just getting slower and slower and slower. You say, "Well, all right, he's running something out." That's a reasonable assumption for two or three minutes. He's running something out and he'll brighten back up again and he'll come back up.

He doesn't. He just goes on getting slower and slower. And you run it for five, six minutes, and he's getting really dog-eared. He's getting quite dilapidated. The wrong way for you to handle it would be go beyond a reasonable time with the same technique that you're using. What you do is just halt in full stride and say, "All right, let's see if we can mock-up something." Kind of boot him awake very gently, because you don't want to surprise him too much or shock him too much. Very gently. "Now, let's see if you can mock-up four or five planets and snap them in." Or "Mock-up four or five and throw them away." You don't care what you make him do with the planets, as long as you're moving around some havingness and trying to get it in and pushing it out. Anything you want to do with it.

But you know, a guy can go unconscious letting go of a mass as fast as he can get unconscious being bit by a mass. He can go unconscious by acquiring a mass, almost permanently. And he can go unconscious by separating from one. You don't care how you remedy this havingness. It's reject or accept. Some preclears, all of a sudden—you say, "Well pull in this…

"I can't," he says, "they keep going away so darn fast."

You say, "Well, make some more go away."

All right. Another thing you could do wrong is use this process every time the guy started to slow down his communication lag. His communication lag slowed off to about five, six seconds while you're doing a process and it's been that way for a minute or two . it's been that way for about three minutes. And the wrong way to go about it would—simply say, "Well, this preclear isn't improving" and suddenly remedy his havingness. When, as a matter of fact, if you'd run about four more commands of exactly the same nature, his communication lag would have speeded right on up and he'd been over the hump. There's some kind of a mechanical manifestation goes on anytime you change the mass of the preclear. You can change the mass of the preclear in numerous ways, but any time you change the mass of a preclear, you're going to get some kind of a manifestation like boil-off, dope-off or stretched communication lag. See?

So to audit him reasonably, to be very reasonable in terms Of auditing him, you would expect—that for a short time—a communication lag to increase and then for it to get more rapid, and having gotten very rapid again you might expect it, having gotten very rapid, to get even more rapid. But what it does is it increases and then it gets more rapid again. The curve up is a sort of a rolly coaster. It goes on bobs and dips and it climbs higher each time. But communication lags increase and decrease. The only thing you want to be upset about is a communication sameness—a no change of communication lag. Let's say this preclear is not in bad condition, has about a second communication lag. You say, "How are you?" He says, "Fine." Second, second-and-a-half communication lag, that's the communication lag. And you audit this preclear for quite some little time. You audit this preclear for a couple of sessions and this preclear has still got a one-and-a-half-second communication lag. Aaaa-booh, there's something—something going on here.

All right. Another thing you could do wrong is assume that it's the process at fault. You'd only really make that mistake early in using the processes that we have. But it isn't I'm trying to shove these processes down your throat or something like that. But it's this kind of a mistake: you make the assumption that there is something wrong with the process and then you don't use it right. You see, that proves it, that there's something wrong with the process—it's not being used right. I mean, that certainly guarantees that one is right. And you know, a guy will fall into this trick every once in a while, kind of unsuspectingly. He'll say to himself, "Well, I don't know, I don't seem to be getting very much results on this preclear—preclear is in very good shape. I know he's in good shape because he has a communication—very, very fast type of communication. He comes in and I say 'Hello' and he starts to tell me all about electronics and he tells me about electronics for fifteen or twenty minutes. He talks just like blazes. I know he's got a fast communication. And this process I'm using on him just doesn't seem to hit anything particularly. Well, I guess it's the process at fault." The heck it would be!

Now, by assuming that there's something wrong with the process, you assume that you're probably going to fail. Now, let's go the other way around. Let's assume the process is right—at least for a long enough period of time for you to learn that it will work. And after you've learned that it will work and after you've seen how it worked, then is the time to vary it and knock the process around. Not before the fact. If you actually, honestly use a process for quite a while and it doesn't do anything, it's certainly the process's fault—if you're using it right. If!

Now, auditing is a matter of judgment. Now, completely contrary to assuming the process is wrong, let's assume this one: You are nothing if not a creature of judgment. If you can't adjudicate, make a decision, make a conclusion, make some sort of a future postulate regarding the case, the process isn't going to work very well for you. You know why it's not going to work very well for you? Because it's running on a flat, monotonous basis, as far as you're concerned. You're saying, "Well, the process is going to do it. If anything wrong happens to the preclear, it's the fault of the process. If anything right happens, it'll be the fault of the process. And I'm just sort of sitting back, off here in a corner someplace, not paying too much attention to this process" and so on. And you know, you're not communicating.

Tell you a horrible fact about communication. This is horrible. You know that it's very doubtful if any words pass over any sound waves between anybody and anybody else. This is doubtful. I don't say this doesn't happen, I just say it's doubtful. If you were to compute actuarially the complete mechanics necessary and the periods of computation necessary, to send and receive a verbal message, you would find that it would rather exceed your imagination. It's far too complex a system and figure to be credible. To think a thought, to put it into words, to put those words onto the vocal diaphragm, agitate the sound waves, hit somebody's eardrum, have the words go in, get unresolved and turn into a thought—this exceeds imagination. It is one of those incredible things. Because when you view the number of sounds and types of sounds and definitions and words, and you find out that you're perfectly capable of understanding a sentence which is being uttered at a very fast rate of speed regardless of what the individual is saying—holy cats, it is not possible to talk, if you assume that the only factors of conversation are the factors of speech. Thee and me have agreed that when thee and me talk, why, then we are going to communicate. And maybe all we're running with speech is a little sort of a signal system. You know, maybe it's kind of a blinker-light system saying, "We will turn on the telepathic waves at the moment when we start running the blinker light." Could be, see.

I mean they don't have to be true, but it's an interesting thought.

Now, it's a very funny thing. If you're really not in there pitching, thoughtwise, you're not really thinking about what you're doing or saying, or something of the sort, if you haven't got some interest in what you're doing, it kind of doesn't land. Now, this is controverted by the fact that you can play a tape at somebody and he'll understand what's on it. Yeah, well, what do you know what ridge is sitting above that tape? I mean, he might be in communication with the ridge above the tape. We could even argue out of that, see. You can argue about anything, mostly because we're using logic.

All right. Now when you audit a preclear and just deadpan the whole thing and dull the whole thing out and so forth, his immediate reaction: he's getting no attention from you. Which is true. Attention is a finite quantity. Let's just lay the communication aside, now, and let's put some attention in on it. Do you know that it would be worth a great deal to a lot of preclears if you were just to sit there and look at them. You know, this would be somebody to look at them, somebody to give them some attention. And they've been going all these years and nobody would look at them or give them any attention or anything of this sort, why, they'd probably pay you handsomely just to sit and look at them. If you put an ad in the paper, "I will sit and look at you for two dollars an hour," you know that you'd get a lot of responses.

Now, let's take in reverse, let's take in reverse, "1 will sit and not look at you" or "I will let you look at me," any one of these variations. You'll find the preclear stuck on one of these: send or receive attention. Some preclears don't audit worth a darn if you look at them. If you'll look at the window and so forth, they'll run. This is real curious. But you look at some preclear very fixedly and so forth and audit him and he's liable to get in restimulation on that day when he went in to see the headmaster because of little Johnny.

Anyway, your method of delivery, however, doesn't have to be too artistic. It doesn't matter what the lilt in your voice is or the quality in musical note or how you hold the little pinkie while you say the words. But the point, the point is the preclear's got to feel you're interested in him to some degree or another. And if you can actually deliver the feeling to an individual that you're interested in him, you in essence will be granting him enough beingness for him to succeed quite markedly with his auditing. It isn't a necessary ingredient, it just makes things easier all the way along the line.

Now, there's another thing. Is there really real reason to sit there inside your body and audit a preclear, body to body, or is this kind of a stupid thing to do? This is kind of a stupid thing to do. Best way to audit a preclear is to very, very handsomely be very interested in him from four or five miles away and just look in some other direction and admire the scenery. Don't try to lock horns with his aberrations one way or the other. You'll do a much better job of it. Let your body's eyes look at him and give him the attention he needs and just go on. It's very interesting how much of a relief this is to an auditor. He thinks he's got to be in there, you see. He thinks he's got to be part of this matched terminal and he thinks lots of things. They're not true. You get what I said just a moment ago. I said the preclear has to have the idea that the auditor is interested in him. If the preclear has the idea the auditor's interested in him, all is solved.

Now, this doesn't mean that the auditor (1) has to be interested in him (horrible thing to say, but true, you see) and it doesn't mean (2) that the auditor has to be in there pitching. You know, I mean, be in there sitting in his body confronting the preclear or in the room looking at the preclear thetawise or any one of these things. I mean, an auditor can be three or four miles away and do a magnificent job of auditing. In fact, very often a much better job of auditing, because he's apparently so calm. The preclear mistakes absence for calmness.

But if you're not outside or you're stuck-in that day or something weird happens to you with regard to this (and if you get outside thoroughly, you won't get stuck-in that day, ever), but if you are auditing in a body and your preclear's sitting there and you're sitting in another chair and you're facing him—and you know something? You might have a slight tendency to audit along with the preclear. Naturally, it makes a complete communication system, the communication system between two somethings. It bounces back and forth. You might kind of have a tendency to audit right along while you're auditing the preclear. There's nothing wrong with that, by the way—not a darn thing wrong with it, as long as you know you're doing it and why. You're not doing it particularly because you have a big machine, you're just kind of obsessively match-terminaled with the boy, that's all—or the girl.

And here's a nice remedy for it: just mock yourself up where he is sitting. "Oh, you mean put a mock-up right in the preclear's body, in full scale, while it's facing you?" Yeah. And you audit that. Interesting trick. You might have it hard trying getting mock-ups and things might get foggy and so forth, but that's an interesting trick. Try it sometime. It'll kind of make you feel like you're draining down in terms of havingness. You might have all kinds of weird ideas. Well, if it does make you drain down, it's, by the way, very, very comfortable. You say that's all right.

You'll find—the first thing you'll find out, ordinarily, if you're stuck-in, is that you've been avoiding putting any energy into preclears. You've been kind of sitting back with a big brace on, see, and holding back from this preclear in order for him to have his own universe. You know, "That space belongs to the preclear" sort of a computation. And some auditors will do this until they get a blank about a foot out in front of their face out here. Well, it's very curious that this is a complete reversal of what you think you ought to be doing. You say, "Well, that'd interrupt the devil out of his self-determinism." No, it won't. See, you happen to be communicating with him. His self-determinism is being interrupted to the degree that you're giving him auditing commands, and this won't interrupt it any further.

Well, what if this sort of thing happens. You do that and you do feel drained down in havingness and you're very tired after the processing and so on and you just decide, then, that you're kind of worn out and you don't want to audit somebody else immediately. And, you know, you know, kind of the idea is bad. What's the matter with getting on/ of the auditing room where you're doing the auditing, going in some other room, and just keep filling up the auditing room full of uranium? Now, that's a curious thing takes place. People you've forgotten were there somehow or other keep popping up from the chairs and couches and exploding into the mass of uranium you keep pouring into the room. Naturally, it's a spot where a great deal of fixity has taken place. So you fill up the room full of havingness every once in a while and blow it. Not by running the stuff out, Change of Space between that room and some other place. Just get handsome about the whole thing and do it all up in solid plutonium or anything you want to, but put it—remedy the havingness, for instance, of a room.

You can, by the way, get a preclear to remedy the havingness of his house. Just keep shoveling it full of gold or silver or something of the sort. And he thinks, "Gee, all that money, all that wood." Doesn't matter what he's thinking. He says, "That's a funny thing, my mother-in-law just blew up in the front room." And all kinds of other things are happening. There's a terrific scarcity of havingness in the house, otherwise there'd never be any house. Anyway.

The truth of the matter is, you see, I was talking about somebody who was auditing, in his body, a preclear, which would be a something-to-something proposition. See? And if he'll fill up an auditing room where he's been auditing somebody, with some heavy mass a few times, he will find out that the stress of the auditing will blow. Yeah, that's the fastest way to do it.

Now if you're auditing while you're exteriorized, something like that, something very amusing takes place. You start throwing nothingnesses out of preclears. Just set up their bodies and smash them to nothing, set up their bodies and poom, nothing.

Now, if you're stuck in a body and auditing and you're auditing a preclear who is exteriorized, it gets very uncomfortable. You're going from a something to nothing. And if you do that on a terrific concentration level, why, it's sort of like praying to God or something of the sort. It's real weird. It upsets one's havingness, again, because it isn't a perfect communication system.

The remedy of such a thing is best accomplished by increasing the havingness of all the areas where you have audited. Now, that actually, is a fairly fast method of going about it. It's really faster to some degree, you could say, faster than Change of Space. A little bit faster than Change of Space simply because a fellow who is in fair condition can dump a room full of mass without thinking about it very much—just dump the room full of mass two or three times and all of a sudden realize that mass is disappearing. And throw the room full of mass a few more times and all of a sudden, bing the mass is static in the room. He's run this stuff out. You know?

This is a little variation. You get—remedy the havingness of a body, the body will get well, Remedy the havingness of a thetan, he gets happy. Well, how about remedying the houses and rooms and particularly auditing rooms?

Now, a big mistake you could make in auditing is to assume that just because you're auditing somebody you're going to go downhill. You know, a lot of people make that assumption. They think, "If I audit at it a long time and so forth, I will go downhill." This may have been true once upon a time, particularly if you made the postulate that you would. But it doesn't happen to be true now. Although preclears can have these long communication lags and can get on your nerves sometime or another, doing this and doing that, the funny part of it is, it can get to be a heck of a lot of fun. It's a sort of a game that can take stature along with Loki's activities, for instance. You're doing an awfully mischievous thing in auditing somebody. You realize that? Look at all of the years they worked and slaved in order to make a slave out of this guy, and in a little while, why, you're springing him—bink, Ping.

It's a good joke. Much more than a good joke: look at the vested interests people have in this guy's aberrations. You're just blowing it to glory. In essence, then, the least you could say about it is that it's funny. You know? If you're going at it in any kind of a good spirit at all, it is; it is rather amusing. To all the people that worked and slaved to get him just exactly fixed in exactly that frame of mind, and you can come along and light a little ladyfinger firecracker, you see, and it just blows the bank. Or something like this. I mean, you're just monkeying with him—your universes. Look at the years it took Mama to absolutely convince this fellow that he ought to be her slave for life. And you come along and work on him for an hour and a half, two hours or three hours or five hours and he goes back home and he says, "Hiya, Mama, I think I'll go down to the club."

"To the club? Oh, I will be here all alone if you go down to the club." "Why don't you have Aunt Mabel over? So long." Whew!

Now, when you run into the terrible seriousness of people's aberrations, sure, it's serious. But it ceased to be serious the moment you could do a good job. The MEST universe actually ceases to be serious the moment you can hold your own in it, much less get better. [laughter] You'll find yourself in that frame of mind, if you haven't hit it. You say, "What do you know, I'm holding my own? Holy golly, look at that!" And then someday you say, "You know what? You know, I'm getting tougher, better. Gee, this is rough, rough business!" Well, the recognition of that fact—is you shouldn't believe, for instance, in self-sacrifice. You shouldn't believe that self-sacrifice is necessary to make somebody well. It's not true. As a matter of fact, if you get too self-sacrificial on the altar of making somebody well, they'll sooner or later stop getting well. So that's inefficient, isn't it?

Now, it isn't that people's illnesses can't be regarded very seriously and they will very often be very upset with you if you refuse to regard their illnesses. So just remain noncommittal, at least in front of the preclear, until he's up to a point . .

You know that preclears will come to you and they'll say, "You know, I have to have a very private session. There doesn't happen to be anybody in. You don't keep any records, do you?"

You say, "Well, no."

"Well, I've got something very secret... and I want to tell you about this and . And you say, "Well, here we go."

Now, if you know your business, if you know your business, why, you can actually shove him up to a point of where he'd just as soon you made a mimeographed copy of it and mailed it to all of his friends. You see, he would become horribly strong and powerful and terrifically suspect—they'd be afraid of him. Actually the environment would start treating him with great respect if he did that, you know. He just overtly, with no emotion or apology, simply wrote down the chapter of his life from the age of twenty-one to twenty-two, that he spent in Bilibid prison or something of the sort. If he just wrote this down and made a statement of it and signed it, with no more emotion than that, and went around and gave it to his friends, they'd have a tendency to kind of draw off from him for a moment. But, they're only drawing Off of him because they're scared. People don't do this sort of thing! By keeping it secret, he's playing right into their hands. He's going around trying to withdraw the mock-up from their presence, you see. Embarrassment is actually just an effort to withdraw the mock-up from view. And that means, "There are certain things I can't present."

You get a guy sometime who has a big guilty complex on something or other, get him to mock himself up doing it in the middle of the police station or having it discovered by the police, and then have him mock-up telling the police about it. And at first, why, you'll get the guy disappearing. You know, the mock-up of the guy will disappear every time he does this. And the next thing you know the mock-up of the police are starting to disappear every time he does it. Sec? I mean, the fact that he could be that open about something that's supposed to be closed down becomes quite embarrassing. This doesn't mean that by full confession—a confession is good for the soul and all that sort of thing. And it doesn't mean that they won't throw him in the clink if he suddenly confessed to the murder he did, but it does mean that he's accepted the responsibility for his own acts. And how otherwise do you lose responsibility than saying, "I didn't do it" or "It's a secret"?

So he comes in to you with no responsibility, telling you all about the secret and he goes out of there. You have to be able to be a good actor, yourself, to some degree. You sit there and you say, "Secret? Oh, no, I never keep any records. No, no, no. I have the place patrolled too, so nobody can get to the desk blotter in case I put any thoughts on it!" "Well, I'm glad."

Anything. It doesn't matter, as long as he believes then that you don't. And then he'll impart this terrific confidence to you. And it's something on the order of he really did steal his mother's sugar bowl when he was five. I mean, it's just as innocent as this. It's something totally human.

Well, the main thing you could do wrong, however, is to take the information which you have and sort of put it in your hip pocket and forget to use it. That could be real wrong. Mostly because it wasn't given to you on the thought that you would do that. But your ability to live and your ability to know happen to be synonymous.

Now, let me make a very clear point with you. We keep calling Scientology and Dianetics "sciences." That's so that we have a word which is in agreement. They are descriptions of the road back, in their technical data. They're descriptions of the mechanical factors that have taken place by reason of agreement. It's only a description, Plus a rather interesting system, based on that description, of undoing those agreements. That's all it is. It's a description.

Well, let's not start fighting back from it on the basis of this and that. Let's not come along and get all balled up with somebody that keeps saying "Your ideas" or "Hubbard's ideas" or something. They're actually accusing you of having invented and run and manufactured the whole track, one way or the other.

Now, you can check all the data we've run across here on E-Meters. It's not data. They're discoveries, yes, but they're not inventions. Get the difference between those two things.

And you could be very wrong and make a lot of mistakes by consistently, constantly insisting on the fact that this is an exact science to somebody who hates the idea of anything, who suspects you of inventing it and so on. It's actually just a description. You make a mistake, in other words, by trying to forcedly enforce a system upon them. The system which you're working with has been enforced upon them, and the subject that you're working with is simply a description of that system. And that's all there is to that.

Okay.

PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 600 26 MARCH 1954

HOW NOT TO GET RESULTS PAGE 6 4ACC-71 - 26.03.54

[[Category:Lectures]]
[[Category:Lectures 4ACC]]
[[Category:Lectures 1954]]