Any and all irrationality is connected to departures from an ideal scene.

Therefore outpoints indicate departures.

It must follow then that rationality is connected to an ideal scene.

These three assumptions should be studied, observed and fully grasped.

They are very adventurous assumptions at first glance for if they are true then one has not only the definition of sanity in an organization or individual but also of neurosis and psychosis. One also sees that organizations or social groups or companies or any third dynamic (the urge to survival as a group) activity can be neurotic or psychotic.

It therefore would follow that the technology of the ideal scene, existing scene, departures, outpoints and statistics would contain or indicate the means of establishing sane groups or individuals or measuring their relative sanity or re-establishing relative sanity in them.

Man has been harassed by irrationality in individual and group conduct since there has been Man.

The existing scene of Man’s activities is so immersed in departures and outpoints that at first survey there would seem to be no possible handling of the situation.

Most people have accepted the existing conditions as “inevitable” and toss them off with a “that’s life.”

This is of course an overwhelmed attitude.

And it is true that the departure from any ideal is so distant as to obscure any feeling of reality about possibly achieving an ideal scene even in a limited area.

Philosophies exist to “prove” that chaos is needful to furnish challenge. That is like saying “Be glad you’re crazy” (as 19th century psychologists did say). Or “Suffering refines one,” as the playwrights of the early 20th century so fondly used in their plots.

One whole religious order preached the necessity to accept Man as he is.

Thus Man is plagued with defeatism, has lacked technology, and civilization after civilization has succumbed, either in a flash of flame and war or in the slow erosion of grinding distress.

Most men, it has been said, live lives of quiet desperation.

One doesn’t have to live through several wars to learn that Man and his leaders are something less than sane.

Every sword-waving conqueror has exploited Man’s seeming inability to avoid brotherly slaughter and no conqueror or army seems to have noticed that wars only rarely shift boundaries no matter how many are killed. Europe for centuries has excelled in the development of marble orchards and failed remarkably to establish any lasting political scene at all.

In other lands government leaders, who should have at least a partial duty of preserving their citizenry have sat raptly listening to the advice of madmen for some centuries now. US leaders lately have taken to acting on the mental health guidance of many civilian committees, each one of which contains at least one member of an organization directly connected to Russia! The country most interested in fomenting US civil commotion! A former head of CIA once cracked for a joke, “What if there were a Russian KGB agent inside CIA?” The shudder of horror that went through US politicians was interesting to see. Yet every new employee of CIA was “vetted” before employment by members of two organizations connected to Russia! The “American” Psychological Association and the “American” Psychiatric Association are directed by the World Federation of Mental Health founded by Brock Chisholm, the companion of Alger Hiss and Whittaker Chambers, the famous US communist traitors. And the US government pays the WFMH to hold congresses which are attended by Russian KGB delegates. And all intelligence given the President on Vietnam, where the US was “fighting communism” was passed through the hands of a man whose parents are both Russian bom communists. And the US Defense Department intelligence on the same war was led and “coordinated” by another communist-connected employee.

With that many outpoints showing up in their social welfare and intelligence scene, the US government seems something less than bright in wondering, “What riots?” “Why drugs?” “Why defeats?”

The statistics of the US welfare and social scene under the domination of the World Federation of Mental Health are soaring insanity, crime and riot graphs. It is so bad that Russia will never have to fight an atomic war. The US economic, political and social scene will deteriorate and is deteriorating so rapidly that the US will have lost any will to fight or any economic or social power to resist Russia.

(In case you wonder as to the factualness of data given above, it is all documented.)

I have given this existing scene so that you can see the outpoints. The deteriorated state of public safety in the US is well known. The fantastic sums it spends are well known.

I have given visible outpoints.

One glance at psychiatric and psychological statistics (which are all negative) would tell any sane person that they must be doing something else as they were given all the money, political power and authority ever needed to handle the scene. But it got worse! So, checking the scene for outpoints, one finds them directly connected to the No. 1 US enemy. Their data is marvellous for outpoints. Paid to serve the US, their literature discusses mainly abolishing boundaries and the Constitution.

The US official, so drowned in the chatter and confusion of double-talk and false intelligence and situation reports, apparently cannot see any solution. And heaps money on his traitors and finances their avid destruction of the country.

Yet, outpoints are so many and so visible that even the citizen sees them while the official remains apparently numb and inactive.

Very well, Man can and does get drowned in his own irrationality. And his civilizations rise and fall.

Man’s primary plague is irrationality. He is not in the grip of a “death wish,” nor is he having a love affair with destruction. He has just lacked any road out or the technology to put him on it.

All the US would have to do is count up the outpoints, look at the statistics, drop their passionate affair with Russian psychiatry, conceive an ideal scene of a productive America, re-channel welfare monies into decent public works to give people jobs and

improve productivity per capita, knock off foreign funds and wars, give the money to increasing the value of American resources and even now the US would become all right. National production would catch up with destructive inflation, money would return to value and an ideal national scene would be approached. Even the military- industrial clique would be happy making bulldozers instead of tanks and youth would have a future in sight instead of a foreign-made grave. The odd part of it is, even the Senate and House would vote for such a program as their own statistic today is how much federal money can they bring home to their own states.

The only ones that would resist are the people who are the ones causing the above outpoints and who knowingly or unknowingly serve other masters than the US. And that’s a simple security problem after all.

I have put the example on a large canvas just to show that the steps of handling departures are the same for all situations large or great.

When done this way, by the steps mentioned in the Data Series, big situations can be analyzed as well as little ones.

Available resources and all that play a part in getting the solution into effect. But the cost in time and action of the original effort to introduce the cycle of revertment to an ideal scene is not anywhere near as costly as letting the departure continue.

One’s direction is lost to the degree one fails to work out the ideal scene.

It is so easy to toss off an “ideal scene” that is not the ideal scene that one can begin with a false premise.

As he tries to work with an incorrect “ideal scene” for an activity he may fail and grow discouraged without recognizing that he is already working with an omitted datum — the real ideal scene for that activity.

This is a major reason one can lose one’s way in handling a situation.

Also in trying to find a WHY of departure one may refuse to admit that something he himself did was the reason for the departure — or why the ideal scene never took place. It requires quite a bit of character to recognize one’s own errors; it is much easier to find them in a neighbor. Thus one may choose the wrong WHY, for this and other reasons.

Failures to examine the scene, reasonableness which causes blindness to the obvious, errors of penetration and defensive reasons not to admit it all impede a proper analysis.

The existing scene may be missing in one’s view because one doesn’t really look at it or because one has no correct ideal scene for it.

Many would rather blame or justify than be honest. Others would rather criticize than work.

But this all adds up to outpoints in the examination itself.

If one keeps at it one will however arrive at the right answers with regard to any scene.

To suppose one can instantly hit upon an ideal scene for any activity without further test is to be very fond of one’s own prejudices.

There is however a test of whether you have the ideal scene or not.

Can you staticize it?

Strangely, but inevitably, since we live in the physical universe where there is both time and association of beings with beings and the physical universe and the physical universe with itself, there is a production-consumption factor in all living.

There seems to be a ratio between producing and consuming, and establishing it would probably resolve that strange subject, economics, as well as social welfare and other things.

It seems to be fatal to consume without producing. Many social observations teach us this.

Evidently one cannot, at the physical universe level, produce without consuming. And it seems that it is destructive to produce only and consume too little. One can produce far more than one consumes, apparently, but cannot consume far more than one produces.

This seems to be true of groups.

Some dreamers puffing on a hash pipe of unreality believe one can really be happy producing nothing and consuming everything. The idyllic ideal of a paradise where no one produces has been tried.

In interviewing secretaries in New York I found the larger percentage had the personal ideal scene of “marrying a millionaire.” Aside from there not being that many millionaires, the dream of idle luxury forever was so far from any possible ideal scene that it was busy ruining their lives and giving their current male escorts a life of critical hell. One, having married a boy who was fast on the road to becoming a millionaire, was so dissatisfied with him not being one right now that she ruined his life and hers.

In short, it sounds nice, but having met a few who did marry millionaires, I can attest that they were either not producing and failing as beings or were working themselves half to death.

These no-production dreams, like the harp in heaven, lead at best to suicidal boredom. Yet Madison Avenue’s ads would have one believe that one and all should own all manner of cloth, wood and metal just to be alive.

A whole civilization can break down, flop, on propaganda of no-production, total consumption. The sweat that flies off a “workers’ paradise” would rival the Mississippi!

There is some sort of balanced ratio and it favors apparently, for pride and life and happiness, higher production of something than consumption. When it gets too unbalanced in values, something seems to happen.

The unhappiness and tumult in current society is oddly current with the Keynesian economic theory of creating want. It’s a silly theory and has lately become to be abandoned. But it was in vogue forty years or more, as I recall. It produced the “welfare era” of the psychiatrist and the total slavery of the taxpayer!

So, whatever the economics of it, an ideal scene apparently has to have a statistic or the whole thing caves in, either from lack of continuity in time, from disinterest, or from plain lack of supply.

Death is possibly, could be in part, a cessation of interested production.

Hard pressed, a living being dreams of some free time. Give him too much and he begins to crave action and will go into production and if blocked from doing so will tend to cave in. Loss of a job depresses people way out of proportion and subsequent declines often trace back to it.

Destructive activities carry their own self-death. The state of veterans after wars is not always traced to wounds or privation. Destructive acts put a brand on a man.

Some of this is answered by the absence of production.

Whatever the facts and economic rules may be about production and the ideal scene, it would seem to be the case, sufficient at least for our purposes, that this rule holds good:

THE CORRECTLY STATED IDEAL SCENE WILL HAVE A PRODUCTION STATISTIC.

The way one defines “production” in this is not necessarily so many things made on an assembly line. That’s an easy one.

It isn’t just pairs of shoes. Production can be defined as the regulation or safeguarding of it, the planning or the designing of it, a lot, lot, lot of things.

A stat is a positive numerical thing that can be accurately counted and graphed on a two-dimensional thing.

To test the correctness of an ideal scene, one should be able to assign it a correct statistic.

If one can’t figure out a statistic for it, then it probably is an incorrectly stated ideal scene and will suffer from departures.

Wrong stats assigned the ideal scene will wreck it. A wrongly conceived ideal scene will derail the activity quickly.

To understand something it is necessary to have a datum of comparable magnitude. To understand logic one needs to be able to establish what is illogic. One then has two things for comparison.

The ideal scene can be compared to an existing scene. This is one way to establish the ideal scene. But both need a factor to keep them in reality.

To test the ideal scene for correctness one needs to be able to formulate its statistic.

The exercise of testing the statement of the ideal scene, to keep it real and not airy-fairy and unattainable, is to work out a realistic stat for it.

One can go back and forth between the statistic and the stated ideal scene, adjusting one, then the other until one gets an attainable statistic that really does measure the validity of the stated ideal scene.

A statistic is a tight reality, a stable point, which is to measure any departure from the ideal scene.

In setting a statistic one has to outguess all efforts to falsify it (predict possible outpoints in collecting it) and has to see if following the statistic would mislead anyone from the ideal scene.

So let’s walk back to the shoe store.

Test statement of ideal scene: to make money.

Test statistic: pairs of shoes sold.

Now if you tried to marry up those two you’d get a prompt catastrophe. The potential departure would be immediate.

We sell shoes at no profit to raise the stat, we make no money. We try only to make money, we sell cheap shoes at high cost and our customers don’t come back and we don’t make money.

So those two are both no good.

Departure would occur, indeed it already exists right in the badly worked out ideal scene and the stat.

Test ideal scene: Cobblers are entitled to the shoes they make.

Test statistic: how many shoes cobbler makes.

So that’s loopy!

Test ideal scene: all citizens furnished with shoes.

Test statistic: number of shoes given away.

Well, that’s bonkers for a shoe store in any economic set-up. The citizens for sure would have no shoes once the shoe store was empty, for if everything is given away, who’d raise cows for hides or drive nails in soles unless he had a gun held on him so what workers’ paradise is this? Slave state for sure. So that’s no ideal scene for a shoe store no matter how “ideal” it looks to a do-gooder. Too airy-fairy. Since no shoes would exist to be given away.

Test ideal scene: shoes for any worker who has coupons.

Test statistic: number of coupons collected.

Well, maybe. In some society. But can the shoe store get shoes for the coupons? Maybe if there’s enough economic police.

But then this would have to be a monopoly shoe store and the quality would not be a factor

So this must be an army quartermaster depot or a state monopoly. If no incentive were needed it would work. Sure would be hard on the corns but it would barely work. Rather insecure though.

But this is a shoe store where people buy.

Test ideal scene: to provide workers with good shoes that can be replaced from suppliers.

Test statistic: ??? Number of shoes from suppliers given to workers. . . . Happy workers. . . ??? Amount of control that can be exerted on suppliers. . . ??? Ah. Number of shoes supplied well-shod workers.

Okay, that’s a QM depot. Now what’s a shoe store!

And we probably get what was given in an earlier example:

Ideal scene: to provide people with shoes and continue in business for owner’s lifetime.

Statistic: percentage of citizens in area profitably shod by this store.

But even this would need to be played back and forth. And if this shoe store was in a socialist country both might require amendment. And if it was in a beach resort thronged with tourists who were also mostly foreigners the ideal scene and statistic would suffer an immediate departure and the store would fail, crash if the ideal scene were not correctly stated and the statistic real. The class of tourist would have a bearing on it.Maybe the state has currency control demands on shopkeepers and requires them to get in foreign currency or no new stock!

Thus you could get:

Ideal scene: engendering acquisitiveness for novelty footwear made in this country. Statistic: pairs of gift shoes bought by foreigners.

That sure would shift the whole atmosphere of the store!

Thus one plays the ideal scene against the statistic.

Maybe one can’t find any ideal scene for the activity and no statistic of any significance to anyone. Could be that the activity is totally worthless even to oneself as a hobby. Although this opens the door to cynicism or a lazy way of not doing anything about anything, it just could be. Even a “reporter” who writes nothing could have an ideal scene and statistic. But it would have to be really real even then. Like,

Ideal scene: unsuspected as a spy while accepted as a “reporter.”

Statistic: cash collected for reports undetectedly delivered to my government.

If that seems unreal as a scene the staff of TIME magazine recently held a mass meeting protesting the use of TIME credentials for government spying. “Nobody will talk to us anymore,” the staff of that dying WFMH mouthpiece wept.

So anything could have an ideal scene, even a police state.

Idealism has nothing to do with it.

The word “viable” means capable of living, able to live in a particular climate or atmosphere.

Life over a period of time requires VIABILITY, or the ability to survive.

Any organism or any group or any part of a group must have a potential of survival. It must be viable — life-able.

This is true of any ideal scene. The statistic measures directly the relative survival potential of the organism or its part.

This tells you the plain fact that life contains the essential purpose of living, no matter how many misguided philosophers or generals may decree otherwise.

The planetary population is now not fully viable since weapons exist capable of making it a billiard ball at the whim of some madman.

The potential survival of the whole is of course an influence and limitation on its parts.

Men who live “only for self’ don’t live.

An organism or group can live a dangerous life in that it risks its survival. But is more of a threat than its enemies if it does not know or adjust its ideal scene.

A military company, told on posters the ideal scene is all brag in the bar with girls on each arm, who find in fact that their actual scene is military police outside every bar with clubs and a real short life under the orders of sadistically disinterested and inexpert government, is presented with an instantly visible departure.

The government believed such posters were needful to get recruits and did not realize that a truthfully stated scene and an effort to promote survival to commanders would also have recruited and conscription needn’t be resorted to as the end product of lies.Men will become part of the most onerous and dangerous groups imaginable providing the purpose is there and stated and they have a chance of survival.

The ideal scene of a nation worshipping death is that of a nation that will not survive anyway. At least not as that nation.

A group or an organism must be viable. The state is relative to the time the group needs to live to accomplish its purpose.

Each part of a group, in any ideal scene, should contribute viability to the whole group.

Production of something is mandatory on any part of a group if the group is to be fully viable.

Painting, writing, music, all have positive roles in a society. So productivity, as is viability, can be seen as a very broad inclusive term.

The sub purposes of any group make up the sub-ideal scene of its various parts.

In other words each part of a broad group has its own ideal scene and its own statistic.

These combined bring about the broad group’s ideal scene.

The statistics each lead to viability of the part and then the whole group.

In reverse, with so many parts of a planet desirous of extinguishing so many other parts, the viability of the planet becomes questionable.

In an organization each part has its own ideal scene and its own statistic on up to the main ideal scene and the main statistic.

In practice one works back from the ideal scene of the group into its smallest part, so that all lesser ideal scenes and lesser statistics mount up to and bring about the main ideal scene and statistic.

Examining the lesser ideal scenes and statistics, one can find outpoints first in how the whole thing is organized and then the main ideal scene and the statistics and how the lesser ones bring it about.

Dominant is the viability of the whole. Where any part does not support total viability it is an outpoint. Contributive is the viability of each part and cohesive is the scheme in which the lesser ideal scenes and the lesser statistics bring about the BIG ideal scene and the BIG statistic. If this does not occur the nonsupportive lesser ideal scene or statistic is an outpoint.

Groups that falter have to have all this restudied. As departures did occur, the organization itself, as part of any action, must be reexamined against experience and new greater and lesser ideal scenes and statistics must be worked out for it and put into use.Agreement of the group is a necessary ingredient as many reformers have learned, often too late, and as many groups have seen, also generally too late.

The trick is to correct the ideal scene and statistic and all lesser ones of the group while it is still alive.

After that one can have better dependence upon them and keep the statistics up and the purpose going forward.