View source for Rundown of Cases (7ACC 540706)

'''Series:''' 7th Advanced Clinical Course (7ACC)

'''Date:''' 6 July 1954

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

----

← [[Lecture_Index_7ACC|Back to Series]]

[Note: This lecture contains periodic variations in sound quality as did the original recording.]

Application of processes to cases. And I'm going to go right straight through from beginning to end. And I should, of course, have my notes here like you have so that I can give you these processes right quick—you know, read them off. But I don't think I need them. It may make me pause for a moment or two to get these in exactly the right order, but tell you the truth, as a matter of fact, I'm exteriorized and I'm reading a notebook that's lying back on my motorcycle, you see. It's obvious that nobody could go over a series of techniques without a notebook. I mean, that's what's obvious!

All right. Now, the first process with which we have any acquaintance at all is—what is it?

Audience: SOP 8. Opening Procedure. Two-way Communication.

Who said that? Two-way Communication.

That's the right answer. That's the first process. It's the first process with which we have any acquaintance is a Two-way Communication.

Now actually, technically speaking, that is a tricky process. That's a tricky process. Now, if you don't look at that as a process, why, you're going to miss occasionally on it. It is a process. And if you don't think so, go on down to the State Hospital down here and start auditing somebody, because about the one you'll face for the first hour or two will be, "How in the name of common sense can I get into communication with this guy? How can I get into communication with him? How can we get one going? How can I get him to say something to me?" and so on.

If you had a catatonic schiz and she was just lying there, you know—it's eighteen years she's been there or, I don't know, however long they keep them around these places—how would we get her into communication? Well, there actually is a method and it is not original with Dianetics or Scientology but has been in use for a long while. And that is Mimicry.

Now, the instigator of this process, by the way, is the great Frieda Fromm-Reichmann whose main comment on Dianetics was to turn around to her personal physician—she goes around with a long entourage, you know, and she's quite an old gal, believe me—and she turned around to her personal physician and she says, "Tell me, Doctor, tell me, please tell me that prenatals do not exist!"

Anyway, old Frieda Fromm-Reichmann will go into a cage with a psycho and anything the psycho does, she'll do. I mean that. Psychos do some mighty strange and peculiar and fascinating things, you know. And anything they do, she'll do. And the first thing you know the guy stands there and looks at her.

Well now, just where this technique came from, I don't know. It's not original with Frieda Fromm-Reichmann. But it requires a tremendous—a tremendous amount of cold nerve and an ability not to care exactly what you handle. And as a result, why, she gets an accessibility. What she then does with the accessibility is something else. But the point is that she actually does spring psychos to the degree of getting them into two-way communication.

In fact, if you were to produce a nice solid process for the sanitariums which merely put people into a two-way communication rapidly, you would have done it as far as psychiatry was concerned. That's really all psychiatry is interested in—just to show you the level of people they process. They're interested in this two-way communication thing. They give people hypodermics and electric shocks and all kinds of things to jolt them into a two-way communication. Well, actually, after they've got them into a two-way communication, they've worked so hard on the problem that they are, at that moment, exhausted. And they did not have the technology nor the understanding of the mind to proceed from there.

What you would do, by the way—for your own information—after you'd achieved a two-way communication with the preclear is you'd do 8-C Opening Procedure on the psycho until the psycho was well. I mean, just that: 8-C Opening Procedure on the psycho, specializing on Part (a) until the psycho was well. I mean just that, no more, nothing else. No mock-ups, subjective rehashes, nothing, nothing. Just that one: Two-way Communication. And if you achieve that, why, you just go into 8-C Part (a). And there's the solution to psychosis on an individual processing level. I know this because I've done this several times now. You know how a psycho used to take eighteen weeks and then you wondered how much more time you can invest? Them days is gone forever!

It's perfectly all right today for an auditor to process a psycho—perfectly all right. I mean, we laid off of them for a long while because auditors were wasting time. But there's a process that fixes them up.

There happens to be another process which is not as good and that's Beingness Processing. And Beingness Processing doesn't measure up to 8-C Opening Procedure but is an allowable process, because occasionally you run into a psycho and this psycho can simply be things. And they'll be things gloriously, but beware: they're liable to drop into a level of apathy which just makes them go crunch.

8-C Opening Procedure, specializing in Part (a). You try to get this psycho to make a decision, you're liable to spin him. So you don't ask him to pick out the spots on the wall and go over to them. You pick them out. What you're trying to find out originally there is "Who's doing it?" And first his hand's doing it and then his arm's doing it and then maybe his feet were doing it. And finally he comes around to the conclusion that he might have had something to do with it. And finally he gets convinced that he is doing it and at that moment you have strung the C to E straight line. See? So he has a direct connection. And you've just directly connected him up now. And that's what's wrong with him. He's indirectly connected. He's connected by shunts and remote coils and etceteras until he's unable to conceive who is doing this process. All right. So much for that.

Now, let's look at that as quite a stunt then: getting into two-way communication with a preclear. Now, there isn't any formula for it anymore than there's a formula for you saying hello and somebody else saying hello. I've noticed that auditors have varying facility in this. Very, very variable. Some auditors seem to just take over and grab the preclear by the nape of the neck, sort of, and you more or less swamp them with beingness. And the preclear goes into two-way communication and everything goes along very, very easily.

And the next guy comes along. He's apparently just as personable as the first auditor. He's not, however, as willing to grant beingness. And we find the preclear being very reluctant and stumbling and so-and-so-and-so and the two-way communication doesn't begin. Actually, the auditing session hasn't begun if there wasn't a two-way communication between these two people.

I saw my little girl, the other day, handling a horse. She's quite well aware of the fact that she is a human being and the horse is quite well aware of the fact that he is just a horse, as far as she's concerned. He gets in her road, something like that, why, she's liable to swat him on the nose or kick his feet aside, you know, if he happens to be in her road. But the odd part of it is that her ability to grant beingness there is quite high and so she can get along with the horse. The odd part of it is she's in two-way communication with the horse.

A carpenter came over the other day and he was going to ride the horse and—effort band, effort band, effort band—he was going to ride the horse. He was going to do something about the horse—effort band, effort band, effort band—and he never got into a conversation with the horse. Horse would not stand still to be bridled or saddled or wouldn't put up with any of this sort of thing. He didn't want to go into communication in any degree.

Well, it's just a difference. Here a little two-year-old kid can go into communication with this horse, but a forty-year-old, rather personable man, could not. Well, actually, that man had the ability. If you listen to his general patter of conversation, he was so eagerly and anxiously making nothing out of everything. You know, "you just had to make nothing out of it." This guy was a bum and that guy was a bum and somebody else was a bum and somebody else was a bum and that guy was a bum, and actually that guy was a gyp but this guy was a bum and this bird was a bum and that bird was a bum but that company was a gyp company and this was a bum and that was a bum and so on. And nyah! And here's a direct coordination between his anxiety to make nothing out of everything in his environment and his inability to get a horse to stand still, get a bridle on him.

Now, this has a lot to do with auditing. If you are under a compulsion to make nothing out of your preclear, the chances are, why, he isn't going to talk to you. Well, what mysticism is mixed up in this? No mysticism. Mysticism is a highly aberrated form of expression for life. Actually, what's mixed up in this is life. And approached on that basis makes a lot of good sense.

All right. Two-way communication. How do you start a communication? You just start talking. That's actually the truth of the matter. And if you're willing to talk and if you're willing to listen, why, you will get a two-way communication with the preclear, usually. And, by the way, about 80 percent of the patients down here in the mental hospital would go into a two-way communication with you, just like that, bing!

We have a continuous difficulty with this. You must always start a session with a two-way communication—always start every session with a two-way communication. If you do that, you won't run head-on into some of the more interesting things that an auditor can get mixed up with. His preclear has just been in good shape day after day, but yesterday, unbeknownst to the auditor, hubby left. Tsk! Oh, oh! And yet the auditor didn't discover this right away and he kept on trying to run the same processes. Yesterday he was running a person who was fairly well; today he's running one that feels awful sick. Obviously the same processes are not indicated. So right along with the two-way communication, just as a booster to the two-way communication, we get the present time problem, if it exists.

I was very fascinated the other day to process somebody—I had got a two-way communication going, talked about a present time problem—there were no present time problems. And then we did some Opening Procedure by Duplication and then we got into Problems and Solutions—Dirty 30. And we got into Problems and Solutions and, by golly, the second we got into Solutions, this preclear practically went out through the walls in all directions. Just exploded on this basis: there was no solution to this preclear's present time problem, so the preclear had discovered that there was no sense in talking about a problem to which there was no solution of any kind whatsoever, so—just why mention it?

It was that buried and we'd just kept on and on and on, on this question: "All right. What kind of a solution could you be?" (Which is the elementary question for running

Problems and Solutions: "What kind of a solution could you be?") And this preclear couldn't get off the fixation on the present time problem enough to recognize that "What kind of a solution could you be?" could be answered by the most interesting things. I mean, it wouldn't have anything to do with either seriousness or present time problems or anything else, but this preclear just kept lying there (threw herself on the couch, by the way, and started beating at the couch), and just kept lying there, "But there is no solution! I couldn't be any solution to that problem! It's an impossibility that any solution to that problem exists!"

And I said, "Would you please listen to the question? The question is, 'What kind of a solution could you be?' "

"But there is no solution to that problem!"

In other words, this was a communication lag which actually did go on for about an hour. That was the present time problem. But that preclear had never mentioned such a present time problem prior to this, never had. Never knew such a problem existed. Didn't show up in any discussion of present time problems. Of course it didn't, because there wasn't any possible solution to it, so why discuss it! All of a sudden we got down to this very interesting computation and even the preclear noticed it as it went by: "Well, of course, he could change, but he won't! So there's no solution to the problem. I could change, but I won't." And the preclear watched that one go by. All of a sudden came out of this fit she was in—says, "You know, that's a funny thing. I guess nothing much could be done with my case thinking that way."

"I won't change," you see. This is the entire computation. There went the case—went up in smoke at that moment. After that, by the way, very light, mild, permissive processes produced a considerable result upon this case.

All right. Now, let's just sweep right on down the line and demonstrate then that having discussed the fact whether or not there are present time problems with the preclear doesn't necessarily reveal present time problems which really exist, but is an interesting way of getting the preclear cognizant of the fact that you are interested in him. That's why you use that little step. It's a booster or an indicator in a two-way communication. All right.

Immediately after that we have 8-C Part (a), 8-C Opening Procedure 8-C Part (a), Opening Procedure Part (b) and Part (c). Remember that you do each one of these as long as you get anything like a physical comm lag or any kind of a comm lag on the individual. And you're boosting his ability to make decisions.

All right. Now, there are two ways you could go at this point if you were going to process a case. You could simply step into Step I of 8-C. And how would you do that? If your preclear on various types of questions, you know, you ask him to do this and he performs it and you ask him to do that, and he's doing all this very well and there's no sloppy lags or something of this sort (this preclear can really snap and pop), what is the idea of going into anything under the sun, moon or stars but 8-C, "Be three feet back of your head," followed by those little processes which simply stabilize exteriorization: "What are you looking at?" "Duplicate it. Duplicate it. Duplicate it." "Find a nothing." "Duplicate it. Duplicate it. Duplicate it." "Hold on to the two back corners of the room," two minutes later, "All right. Let go." "Give me some places where you're not." "What are you looking at now?" "Duplicate it. Duplicate it. Duplicate it. Duplicate it." "Find a nothingness." "Duplicate it. Duplicate it. Duplicate it. Duplicate it." "Hold on to the two back corners of the room," two minutes later, "Let go." "Give me some places where you are not."

I mean, you can go round, round, round on that record. And their perceptions keep coming up, up, up. And this gives them a certainty of location, exteriorization. And it isn't something terribly difficult for them to do. You don't direct their attention to anything, in other words, right after you get them out.

So what would you do? You could simply say to somebody who was obviously in good shape—the moment that you ran 8-C on them, they were just obviously in fine shape—you could simply say, "Be three feet back of your head" and stabilize their perception, exteriorization, so forth. Take them on a Grand Tour, do some Change of Space, remembering to remedy their havingness and so on, and you would have a very, very good result out of it. And it'd be very fast, wouldn't it? But this person would not have had any comm lags on the next-to-the-last list of Self Analysis, no comm lags on ARC Straightwire.

So, not as a process but as a little test. Looks like you should have done something before or after 8-C (doesn't much matter where you put it) to establish this fact: can he exteriorize? See, that's your question: can he exteriorize? Well, you want to know. All right. The way to find out is ask him, "All right. Now, can you recall something that's quite real to you?"

"Oh, yes."

"All right. What was that?" "Mm-hm. Can you recall a time when you were in good communication with somebody?" Well, he can. "A time when somebody agreed with you?" "Sure."

"All right. Now, when was that exactly?" "Okay. And a time when you were in good communication with someone?" "Oh, you can? All right. That's fine. Be three feet back of your head."

Just as easy as can be. See how well that functions there? No comm lag. Boy, will this guy exteriorize! Of course, when they do have a little bit of a comm lag—they can even have a considerable comm lag and still exteriorize, but they will really exteriorize as a 2.0.

You want to locate your Step I in an awful hurry. Just ask them, "Remember something real." Your Step I will give you an instant response, no comm lag. In other words, he isn't bogged down in energy. So, it looks to me like that process ought to be around there someplace. Another thing: that process oddly enough will occasionally break up a neurosis on somebody, just like that. And so you don't want to miss on that band either.

So, after your Two-way Communication, your present time problem, you could have done next-to-the-last list Self Analysis and then done 8-C. Or you could do your Two-way Communication, present time problem discussion and immediately after that some 8-C right on down the line, then ask them some subjective processing, you know, next-to-the-last list. And, boy, if they—no comm lag, just, "Be three feet back of your head." All right.

Now, the way I've been doing it, by the way, has not been Two-way Communication, present time problem, next-to-the-last (or ARC Straightwire is its proper name), 8-C. Way I find myself doing it is Two-way Communication, discussion of the present time problem, some 8-C and ARC Straightwire—just momentary, little slapdash, just as an exteriorization test. And boy, that's really covert, isn't it?

Ask a guy if he can remember something real. Well, if he has any comm lag on it at all, don't ask him to be three feet back of his head. Don't do it! What you want to do at this point if he has a lot of comm lag, why, you just do some more 8-C. Just do some more because you probably missed that he was running in an apathy band or something of the sort. But, what you could do—couldn't exteriorize, long communication lag, that sort of thing—you say to him, "Okay. Now, here are two objects. Let's get well acquainted with these objects." Dirty 30, here we come. Now, I would simply do all of 30, right down the line. How many steps are there to 30 today? There's 30, Issue V, it's got five steps. One of those steps has two parts. That's the Attention step—has two parts. Now, there's attention—there is Attention by Duplication. That's part of the attention.

Male voice: Problems and Solutions has two parts.

Yeah. Problems and Solutions actually has two parts, too.

So, here we go right down the line—two objects and just by rote. You know how to do that process. And how long would you do it? I would do it until he could do it like a well-oiled machine because, after all, you're trying to put him under supercontrol anyway, you know—and as he will always tell you if he's really having a rough time. So, you want him to go from one object to the other object, back and forth.

Only, you know that there can be an actual difference from auditor to auditor in the ability to handle Dirty 30—a considerable difference in the technique from auditor to auditor, as strangely exact as this process is. What's the difference? Well, the auditor who is very good, when he runs it, makes awfully sure, continuously, that the preclear really is communicating with the objects which the preclear is handling and is looking at. And the auditor makes him describe them. And the auditor directs his attention to them. And the auditor is quite inexorable about the whole thing.

And another auditor could simply run it by rote and a preclear could occasionally get by that couldn't actually look at two dissimilar objects one after the other. He couldn't really look at these objects. He wasn't in communication with the objects. And he could go through it on some sort of sloppy idea of, "It's all unreal anyhow so why do anything about it?" Actually, that unreality would fold up if he was made to really get in there and grind.

So, it's the amount of attention which the auditor can get the preclear to put on these objects, which is—that's sloppy—"amount of attention." Attention is not quantitative. But the amount of attention which the auditor could get the preclear to put on the object would determine the workability of the technique and, what do you know, would amazingly shorten the technique.

Now, the horrible part of attention, in directing attention like Opening Procedure by 17

Duplication— by the way, don't miss it: you're directing attention in that one, just as your Attention by Duplication—in directing the preclear's attention and getting the preclear into good communication with it, the auditor still doesn't shorten the process below an hour. When you set down to do that one, you do it! And it works better if it is done consecutively rather than today some and tomorrow some and the next day some and so forth. It works better, actually, if you simply sit down and do it as long as it has to be done, continuously. You just go right on through it. It works better if it's done this way. It's something like penicillin, you know, the bugs build up a resistance to it. Now, that doesn't say that the preclear is an insect! He's not an insect. I'll have you know these Arizona insects are self-respecting, sane bugs!

Now, the next part of Dirty 30 is, of course, Problems. The next subpart is Solutions. Next part is Granting of Beingness. And there—what do you know—a lost part of 30! I gave you this long talk about not needing my notebooks and all of that sort of thing. That's mostly because I haven't done it for ages on any preclear.

Well all right, let's just take one out, just like that: we just get Attention Spanning and then Attention by Duplication. What's Attention Spanning? You have him put up a couple of objects and put his attention on both of them, getting both of them equally real. And then have him get more and more objects real and more and more objects, you know, in this span of vision. We'll go into that later as a special process. And then Attention by Duplication of which you're already familiar.

All right. Now if we've run all the way through that gamut—and, by the way, it doesn't take forever, you see, to run that. You are after all—you got the person who was going to exteriorize immediately and you exteriorized him. Maybe afterwards you had to do some Opening Procedure by Duplication. Maybe you had to do Dirty 30 on this person after he was exteriorized. But look, here is your case already exteriorized and exteriorizable. If the case doesn't have a comm lag, they'll just exteriorize, just like that! [snap]

What's a comm lag tell you? There's energy mixed up in this case. This case is concentrated heavily on energy. All right. That's the first thing a comm lag tells you. And so you exteriorize the person. You've got them into good shape quite rapidly. Now, if they didn't go all the way on up into good shape, you still throw 30 at them. That was a short process, wasn't it?

Well, you're taking the long haul, you're taking the boy who in the yesterdays used to be able to absorb 250 hours of processing without getting even dented. That's the boy you're taking down the line through this. He could absorb all kinds of processing. You'd say he's getting better and things are better and everything is fine and he's looking up and he's losing a little bit of an aberration here and there and so forth. Well, you're taking this fellow by running Procedure 30—using that route of the forked road—you're taking this fellow and you're booting him right on up the line in an awful hurry. You're getting changes. You're getting changes and you're getting more changes.

Well, there's another way to get changes on top of them. There is good old 8-D's Opening Procedure. And that's the one you would follow Dirty 30 with—Opening Procedure of 8-D. Well, it has three parts. And I don't mean to go into any vast discussion of it. But this spotting spots in the room and moving the body around in the room is the most elementary form of that. There are three considerations which you handle by moving him into spots in the room. Well, there's that process and it is just a process. And it produces some very interesting case changes, very fast.

But what chance have you got producing these interesting case changes if you haven't smoothed this guy out in a lot of other departments? Well, you haven't got much of a chance, believe me. This boy will avoid and he will think other things and he will do other things, up to a point of where it'd drive you half mad as an auditor just to wonder why you're using this process on him and it's not working. Well, it's not working because he's not doing it. Oh, but how can a person walk right around in front of you and not do the process? Well, this putting the body into spots requires this: it requires the preclear to make a consideration and that's not visible. And this is what he'll vary. So, that comes long after he's learned how to follow orders and learns it doesn't kill him to do so.

All right. After we've run the gamut down the line there, we would run into Exteriorization by Distance run on an extrovert-introvert alternation. How we boot him out of his head then, for—really? We just kick him on out and square it up. He'd be in shape to do so—do this with.

Well, how many techniques does that leave you that you have to know? Well, it's apparently quite a few. There are quite a few there. But actually, it's a finite number. And they are all done in specific, particular ways. I mean, they don't have a lot of variation and they don't require a lot of criteria and you do produce the results. And what you're running on the case are those techniques which have been found to produce broad and lasting results on many, many cases. So that you're auditing all the time with a security that you're going to get there. And that is about the most comfortable thing an auditor can do.

Okay.

CERTIFICATES OF DIANETICS AND SCIENTOLOGY

RUNDOWN OF CASES PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 9 7ACC-13 - 06.07.54

[[Category:Lectures]]
[[Category:Lectures 7ACC]]
[[Category:Lectures 1954]]