View source for Subjective Processes (Continued) (1ACC 531016)

'''Series:''' 1ACC

'''Date:''' 16 October 1953

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

----

← [[Lecture_Index_1ACC|Back to Series]]

Well, finishing off the October the 16th morning lecture, let's sit down and we'll give it a moment or two.

Merely wanted to remark to you that your problems of exteriorization, your problems of getting out of or into a location, are the same.

The thetan has problems in getting into and out of locations and you, with a preclear, have problems in getting him out of and into locations.

The very best processing, then, which can be done on an individual is merely to train him to get into and out of locations. That's the very best drill and the very best process that can be done.

Now, a note came in from Phoenix which I found interesting. In using Formula H, an auditor out in Phoenix reached basic-basic and turned on sonic and visio on the whole track. It took him about ten hours with the case. And he did nothing but reach and withdraw from, and get basic-basic to reach and withdraw from him. He just spotted this using the theory in the first book, you see, and used Formula H - Reach-Withdraw; Grasp and Let Go - and for, specifically, the first aberrative incident on the case. He just specified this, you see, and got reach and withdraw from it - in about ten hours.

I suppose - I hope - he interspersed this with some Six Steps, something of the sort. But the fellow's track blew open and in the occluded areas which remained on the track, the fellow knew everything that was in them. He was trying to still clean them up one by one, but he was making good progress at this. He turned on full sonic and visio by running Formula H on the first incident of pain and unconsciousness on the bank. Interesting technique.

Ross didn't tell me who had done it there. He merely said that one of his auditors had simply sat down when the PAB came in and remembered basic-basic and had suddenly gotten "reach and withdraw for basic-basic" and run it about ten hours and this result had happened. That's a whole series of one case and he didn't tell me really what the state of the case was before he began this. But I would presume that the case had no sonic or visio.

Now, what you'd be doing there would be plotting your way through a thinking machine. The thinking machine is composed of a life track.

I wrote a book in 1938 and probably will never completely recover from having done so. And I gave this book the working title - the mask you might say - of Excalibur. And it was quite a book. It contains, in essence, most of the theory which has been later used. But it didn't have it in any kind of a transmittable organization.

Every once in a while - the book has sufficient orienting factors in it that every now and then I am struck by the fact that we have gone into too deep, technical communication networks concerning this material. And I go back and reevaluate the material against the original postulates in that 1938 book and all of a sudden we lose a lot of technology suddenly and gain a lot of workability.

It would seem to indicate, if the reductio ad absurdum were followed, that everything would simply boil down to one flash. And this would be very nice to contemplate but I have not found this really taking place.

I have, however, found that with the Prelogics, the fact that the mission of theta is to create space in which to locate matter and energy - the Prelogics are a very definite advance. There's the theta-MEST theory and those. They're very good evaluating theories. Extremely good.

But in this original book there is something that you should know: A man is as sane as he considers himself dangerous to his environment. A real good one for you. That is a not entirely integrated statement. But it is an entirely workable statement.

A man is as sane as he considers himself dangerous to his environment. A woman is as sane as she considers herself dangerous to her environment. Follows with a corollary that a person is as bad off as he considers himself in a dangerous environment. Follow?

Insanity, then, would be that condition pursuant to the consideration of the individual that he is in a dangerous environment, so dangerous that it cannot ever be coped with now or in the future and probably in the belief that he'd never coped with it. See, that would be the complete "gone apathy" about the whole thing.

Well, now let's integrate that with regard to the fellow caught in his body. He is not dangerous to his environment as much as he would like to be and he considers his environment dangerous to him. If you remember this as an auditor - if you remember this, actually, as a case, your problems have a tendency to sort of wither away.

Is the environment dangerous? Well now, the environment - if the environment, at this instant, is demonstrably not dangerous, this universe has this additional threat - this universe poses the threat that one can be struck or influenced by things which are now on the way; they happened yesterday, you see, and the beam is still traveling and you cannot perceive it until it arrives, see?

Well, that is a continuous threat in this universe. It's a continuous threat right here on Earth on this magnitude: that there is a meteor or a comet of some vast size headed right straight at Earth and it is traveling well above the speed of light and is therefore not perceptible and would not be perceived until, all of a sudden, in the calm of the business day, there's a puff and a flash all around and everything is gone. You see this? There would be no warning. And danger is monitored by this phrase: "No warning."

That which is most dangerous is that which acts without warning. And if you will notice, an individual who does not consider himself completely ferocious to his environment always gives ample warning. He argues and threatens before he strikes.

Let's take the career of the "Brown Bomber." He fought his way instantly, almost, into the heavyweight title, by doing what? He struck without warning. He was fairly fast. There was no telegraph to his blow at all. He'd step into the ring. The opponent would step out of his corner. There would be a moment of size-up and then there would be a heavy crash. Actually, the box office for this fighter, Joe Louis, started to fall off because people, fight after fight, would simply go to the fight to see an opponent leveled with a blow. That was all. Without warning. Well, of course, there was actual warning. The other fellow knew that he was a boxer; he knew he was going to get struck; he knew he himself was going to do some striking. But I would like to see the condition of some of the boxers who fought Joe Louis. Must have been horrible.

All right. So the "Brown Bomber" starts piling up in his career a number of overt acts. And these overt acts get higher and higher. And so we have more and more warning on the part of Joe Louis. He spars longer and he starts to move out of the first round into the second round. And just before his final crash from the crown, he actually fought a complete fight without a knockout. All right. There is your extensional warning, see? He's warning longer and longer and longer. You go from no warning at all to, oh, just so much warning that nobody pays any attention to it. You see?

You have, then, a ratio that you could draw. And you could draw on one side of the picture, you could draw "all warning and no force" - "no result," you see, "no arrival." And on the other side of the picture, you'd have "no warning and all force."

A person has as much trouble as he is unable to generate force. The society believes that a person has as much trouble as he generates force. It says, "He who lives by the sword dies by the sword." Of course, you realize that that little maxim of life in this society is very well adopted and never successful - never.

If a person has a great deal of force you generally will find him acting quite different than on a blow-force-impact kind of existence. Because he's way up - he's above this; he doesn't see that there's enough danger in the environment to cause him to go around hitting everybody. Some fellow could stand and yap at him for an awful long time and nothing would happen. You see, he just would not be persuaded that there was danger. And there is an upper-scale reaction. Now, that goes way up above the "Brown Bomber."

And you find people who are usually very successful would have to go down scale a long time to get the idea that they would have to hit people. Now, don't mistake, then, the top and the bottom of the scale. They don't talk in terms of threats and they're not posing threats. They're not giving warnings about what dire things are going to happen if such-and-so and so-and-so happens, and so on. They just go on and lead a fairly happy life; they're not worried about it. Once in a while they suddenly find out that the MEST universe can throw a - a something at them at the speed of light and it arrives before they knew it was started and this is quite a shock to them. This is when they start down Tone Scale.

What's the plot, then, of your preclear? The plot is that he can hold off and hold a space because space is important. The particles are not important; the space amongst the particles is important. He can hold off from him his engram bank, regulate and handle his ridges with great ease - with great ease - so long as he has an enormous quantity of force. And when he doesn't have any force, or when he thinks he doesn't have any force (same thing), he gets down, down, down and all of a sudden the bank starts caving in on him. See?

Now, you want to know what's wrong with a pc? The first thing that's wrong with a pc is he believes that, if his bank is pretty badly caved in... His bank is caved in if he's caught in one of his own theta traps, believe me. He'll be all full of facsimiles which ought to have space between them. There's no space between the time he kissed the girl in Poughkeepsie and present time - although he was sixteen when he did that and he's now forty - no space between them, no time, because there's no space between here and Poughkeepsie. He knows he's got to hold here and Poughkeepsie apart in order to have them separate; he knows this. And yet he doesn't have to. It's a great relief to such a person to find out that he's not all the time holding the MEST universe anchor points away from him.

There's Comparison Processing. This teaches him that the arms of the chair, after he's compared two of them, will stay there until afterwards. They'll stay there. He can come back in the room a little while later; you've never asked him to look.

Your inverted cases, then - your inverted cases, then, have their greatest inability with holding space. And holding space is a keynote, because if you can't hold space between two objects, then you can be struck and, therefore, you don't have the force.

Now, the thetan's desire is to get smaller and smaller and smaller and smaller and smaller and deal with smaller and smaller things - your old people have smaller cells than young people, by the way - deal with smaller and smaller things until he's finally come in to a point where he knows he can get warning. See, he's operating on a small enough gradient so that anything that happens, he'll have warning. He's got communication networks out, again, only so he'll get warning. You see that clearly?

So the trouble with your low - your caved - in case is he doesn't believe he's dangerous to his environment. Well, one of the reasons: He's done so many overt acts that he thinks he should now suffer by being weak. This is an entirely different kind of goodness than a guy who just natively wants to be good. You see? Get the differentiation between the two.

All right. As we look, then, at a case that has to be dug out of a theta trap, the first thing that you have to dig out of the case - if you are really, really, real good - would be the concept that his environment was dangerous to him. And there, between the two things, we get the difference between Objective and Subjective Processing.

His environment is dangerous in the MEST universe, so therefore he has retreated into a subjective viewpoint and retreated, actually, away from the viewpoints he's using in the body. You see how it's happened? He's got a dwindling perimeter. And again we come into dwindling perimeter.

A fellow thinks that if he uses a big perimeter he'll get hurt. And therefore, it's up to you in Perimeter Processing or any such process to teach him that he can have a terrific perimeter and nothing will knock him to pieces.

When you first start to do this he'll start getting somatics and expect things to happen; he'll expect the bank to cave in on him because he's hold - you're making him hold too much space. He knows it's not safe to hold this much space.

Now, when he says, "I have no responsibility for it," he says, "I can't do anything about it," which when he says, "I can't do anything about it," he is immediately and instantly saying, in so many - "I have no space."

The fellow who says, "Well, all right, all right, so they're fighting in Mghanistan. I can't do anything about it." You've suddenly - you've suddenly had him admit that he couldn't con- he couldn't have the space of Mghanistan.

And now, this is the biggest trick that your real entheta boys use. They get people to go around admitting they can't have any - can't do anything about things.

And so, the second you ask your V to be three feet back of his head or eight miles and he finds out he can't do it, he automatically makes a postulate that he can't do anything about it. Now, from here on he expects you to dig him out or some communication system to dig him out and he's sitting there waiting to be the effect of a process. You see how that is? So therefore, you have to give him a process which gives him space which undoes what's wrong with him. And if you can give him enough space, make him build and hold enough space, both here in the - in his own universe and in this MEST universe, you've got him fished out.

The only thing that a theta trap is, is a no space area. Just redefine theta trap in terms of no space. If you could just make him see the space between two molecules of a steel post to which he was stuck, he would feel better. "Ha-ha," he'd say, "there's space between those two molecules. Well, look at that. There's space between those molecules and those molecules down there. Look, there's space between the top of the post and the bottom of the post."

Another way to do a theta trap is simply to look at the top of the trap and the bottom of the trap - just conceptually look at the two and compare the two. But if you want certainty on it, you compare the top of the trap with the bottom of the trap and then make a facsimile of the top and a facsimile of the bottom and compare those two facsimiles. Remove it one step. He's got reality on the - he knows he made a facsimile. He knows he made a duplicate, see? Compare the top and the bottom of the trap.

Now, this tells you that there's a lot of processes. You want to take small gradients to big gradients. And what else would you do that would accomplish the same thing as Perimeter Processing and yet wouldn't carry him into energy? You'd start into the first stage of Objective Processing. Perimeter Processing is the last, deepest and gruesomest stage of Subjective Processing - interior, own universe.

Now, you'd go from there into your next stage which is Objective Processing. And that would be comparing the right ear with the left ear. He knows he can't see his two ears, so have him make two duplicates; make him make a duplicate of his right ear, make him make a duplicate of his left ear and compare those two duplicates.

Then make him make a duplicate of his right shoulder point and his left shoulder point and compare those two duplicates. Make him make a duplicate of the top of his head and a duplicate of his heels. Compare those two duplicates.

Then have him put his hands wide apart, like a cross, and compare his right hand with his left hand. But remember, don't make him realize that he can't do anything about it. That's what invalidation is. The definition of invalidation is making somebody realize he can't do something about it. So you compare the duplicate of the right hand with the duplicate of the left hand. "Now put your two hands out there, and now make a duplicate of the right hand and make a duplicate of the left hand and now compare the two duplicates. Throw them away."

You just take all the parts of the body. Take the right knee and the left knee, the right big toe and the left big toe. And each time you make a duplicate of the right big toe and a duplicate of the left big toe. You got it? Simplicity. This is Comparison, run on the theta trap of the body.

Honest, these people are really so scared of what the body is going to do that they've got to maintain continual control on it. If you were to run the concept on them "stopping insane motions," you'd get quite a lot of line charging. They know what insane motions they've got to stop. And they're trying to stop insane motions all over the place.

Now, this is Comparison Processing compared up to the body. And this again has a tendency to spring somebody. Because what are we back to now? We're back to Step II of SOP 8. And we are using in Step II of SOP 8, Comparison Processing.

So that's what I want you to do today: Step II, SOP 8, with Comparison Processing. And you will notice a subtle difference between that and Perimeter Processing. Okay?

Are there any questions about the process I've just outlined?

Male voice: Hm. When you have him duplicate that, are you having him hold up two or four?

Two. One of each.

Male voice: Matched terminals.

And now, of course, you get along to a certain level in this and they all of a sudden get impatient about duplicating it. But you can run an awful long time by making him duplicate and compare the two duplicates.

Male voice: Any particular place to duplicate them? I mean, outside or beside the actual parts?

Just alongside the actual parts, occupying - like you'd see a double image. You'd have a body a foot above the body, you know, in the same spot, but just a foot higher. The hand would be maybe a few inches above each hand - the duplicate hand.

But you're not asking him to see his hands; you're asking him to see a duplicate of his hands. And what do you know, that's what he's doing! See? He won't look at his hands, he can make a duplicate of them and then he doesn't know he's making a duplicate of them, he says. And then he's very surprised and very upset when all of a sudden he discovers that his hands aren't his hands, that he's been looking at facsimiles. Exteriorization by scenery is the same thing. But you run exteriorization of facsimile, and you run in duplication with it, you've got yourself a very neat technique.

All right. Let's, then, arrange to exteriorize all hands today. I'm tired of people worrying about it. And we'll turn on perception.

But remember that turning on perception is again a problem in force and energy. But that isn't what it's in a problem of because force and energy is a problem in space. And space is in a problem of anchor points and being able to hold out anchor points.

If a fellow can't put out an anchor point a hundred feet away from him, at will, and perceive with it, don't expect him to see with his MEST eyes because he's going to be kind of blind. You should be able to see ultraviolet and through fog and everything else, with your MEST eyes. They're built to it. And yet everybody's on such a narrow perception band that they - that you should be able to hear up to about twenty-five thousand cycles. Nobody does.

All right. Are there any questions, now, about this?

Well, I - if there are no questions now, it's either because you know all about it or you are dazed and I hope it isn't the latter.

Male voice: Can you drill on that?

Hm?

Male voice: Just drill on that?

Yeah, just drill on that. And you intersperse that, of course, with Duplication Processing.

Male voice: Yes, Sir.

And intersperse it with just a pure Step II. You get this?

Female voice: You want us to stay on parts of the body, mostly?

Hm?

Female voice: You want us to stay on parts of the body mostly?

Well, you can - you'll have to, just in running it - I leave that to your judgment - you'll just have to pick up the lamp and duplicate it, because you're processing in too close when you're processing the body all the time. And again, you'll condense the fellow's energy if you don't watch it. So you should go off into other duplicates and so forth. And remember to get his body out there in front of him.

Now, if I were - if I were running this on a pc that was around V, I would say, "All right, put a duplicate of your right hand five feet in front of you and to the right and a duplicate of your left hand five feet in front of you and to the left; now compare those two duplicates." And I would build his body up in front of him as a variation of the technique. Variation of the technique.

But now we're going to see how smart you are. I've given you the fundamental technique: Step II crossed with Duplication. I'm going to see how very clever you are. I don't want you to run the process. I want you to exteriorize everybody you're processing. You get the difference?

I want you to observe incidentally the superiority of an objective over a subjective technique.

Okay.

Let's get our assignments.

[End of lecture.]

1st ACC (16 October 1953) SUBJECTIVE PROCESSES (CONTINUED) PAGE 8/ NUMPAGES 8

[[Category:Lectures]]
[[Category:Lectures 1ACC]]
[[Category:Lectures 1953]]