Okay. On this continuation of a new principle here of admiration, this is the last data on this, the last data on these tapes.

You can perceive, anywhere communication has been interrupted, the whole process of individuation or identification. You will find, if you wish to trace this principle, that your identity is derived from a series of interrupted admiration lines. And if you'll just trace that back, your identity would go up toward a feeling of individuality and of capability. You are holding on to an identity insisting that it be admired. Yeah, that's all, that's the only reason you're holding on to it; and that's why the preclear is in his body at Case Level V and stuck. He knows he's got to survive, and survive is persistence, and persistence is nonadmiration so to — you've got to cut down this man's persistence on a reactive level, that's all. And you just cut down his persistence on a reactive level, and he of course will discover persistence on an analytical level. Because the reactive level is the MEST-universe energy which has disappeared out of sight. He's no longer able to admire this analytically.

Now, you are running here — you are running here, in essence, flows. And as much as anything, it is opportune that this material finishes off the Philadelphia Series. These admiration tapes belong at the end of the series — for this reason, is this rattles you. The reason it rattles you, it's dealing with memory. Memory by facsimiles. And you must have down pretty well the whole idea of terminals and flows and what we know of the behavior of terminals and flows. And we must know also that terminals and flows are not desirable. Therefore, we must know that postulates of energy are not very desirable.

Well now, memory, when it is contained in — as an automatic response mechanism — in energy, is of course to a large degree in the reactive mind. A lot of memory is in the reactive mind. You'll get a flow goes one way, and it'll go back the other way. That's vacillation. The person decides to do something and then they decide not to do it. And then they decide to do it, and they decide not to do it. That is reactive thought, but that is thought very, very sharply on the level of energy.

Now, this material is so germane to the operation of the human mind that it actually will flick on and flick off as the auditor is trying to use it. Now, I don't ask you to lay that in as apostulate; I'm just telling you that so you won't worry about this fact. But we've got all this other material up to this point, and terminals. Now that's all fine. You've got that, you've nailed down that; you've got it on an analytical level. Now let's look at it — let's look at it here from a standpoint of trying to use it.

Self-processing on this technique, if you were to lie down and try to run yourself on it, will leave you every time suspended someplace on a run-out terminal with a blank memory on what you were doing. It's just — it's just certain that that will happen, and then you will kick along for a little while and you will go into a decline. You will get sick a few hours later or a few — something of that sort. You'll start to feel upset, and you won't have much of an inclination to find out what happened that you got upset about.

And you ask a preclear who has done this, "What were you running?" and he'll fish around for quite a while. Forgetting is in essence putting something away. And when you're starting to discharge facsimiles, to the degree that you start to discharge them on running flows and separating terminals, to the degree that you can separate them with just a little bit of running on this, you are of course going to get this manifestation of forgettingness. But don't worry about that. That is a reactive forgettingness, and you don't want it.

You're so used to thinking in terms of automaticity, of having the solution presented to you without really analytically in a flash examining all the facts and coming to a conclusion (which is thinking, really), you're so used to the automatic character, the stream of consciousness thing, that you expect to kind of submerge the data and have it handed back to you again. And this isn't going to happen. And so this is the bail-out of automaticity. You can get out of this automaticity to a large degree with this.

So for that reason, I'm going to put down here — and I may not cover all of them, and there may be many more — I'm going to put down here briefly how you run this. I'm going to ask you to write it down so that you can use it.

Now the first thing you do with this is to realize that your preclear believes there's a scarcity of admiration. So your first goal is to work him with mockups until he realizes that he can create this particle called admiration, and this resolves his concept of the idea it's scarce. And if you don't do that, you're going to bog down with a lot of your preclears.

The next step that would go along with this — I beg your pardon — the step by which you do this (let's put that one in right there): How do you disabuse him of the idea of scarcity of admiration? The way you do this is to get mock-ups which put no stress on him. Things — you mock up things that just don't matter. You just don't plunge down to the heart of this case, crash! you see, and run the heaviest thing you can think of in this line, because your preclear is convinced of the scarcity of this particle. (It's very scarce — he can only make a universe full of it!)

Now, therefore, you mock up admiration for things that don't matter. And preferably for things. Oh, silly things, you know. Had a couple of them working with last night and found out the preclear was running popcorn. Admiring popcorn.

Now remember that you're dealing with flows, here, even though you're dealing with mock-ups. And the first manifestations you're going to get are flow manifestations. So your flow is going to go just so far, and is then going to stop and want to run back.

So get your mock-up under this level: Mock up him admiring popcorn, and then the popcorn admiring him.

And he'll say, "Well, that's too unrealistic, I really can't get the popcorn admiring me, and so forth."

So you say, "Well, have somebody admire you by giving you some popcorn."

Well, he guesses he can do that or something of that sort.

"Somebody gives you a bag of popcorn because they admire you." See, you can cut it in about that level.

And now, "All right. Now you admire the popcorn." You've just got flows going back and forth, you see?

Work any way you can work this way (remember you're working two ways) and sort of argue around with your preclear until you can actually get him admiring things and things admiring him, particularly if they don't matter. And he'll become quickly amazed at the idea that he's mocking up this feeling of admiration.

Now, if he's a Case Level V he isn't going to see any popcorn, is he? So you could go in with all sorts of things. You could get him to admire a concept of a mock-up, and get the concept of the mock-up to get the concept that it admires him. I mean, that's very faint, isn't it? I mean, you get — you get him to get an idea he's admiring something out there, and then you get that something out there to get the idea that it's admiring him.

Again, something that doesn't matter.

Now, if you put him on an E-meter, and you get a bop on anything you're using for this admiration mock-up, don't use it. This stuff's too tough. And if you used your E-meter on this — and you should have him on an E-meter, for lots of reasons — you make awfully sure that you're not getting admiration on something that's hot. Get a nice null. You want a nice, quiet meter for this. And if that meter starts to get very agitated on the line, you come off to something that's even less hot.

Now, you can do this with Self Analysis simply by getting mock- ups; and a Case Level V isn't getting mock-ups, you understand, but he can get the idea he's got a mock-up out there. And you can get him — get him to get the idea that he admires the mock-up and that the mock-up admires him, and he's just got an idea that it's out there and he doesn't have to feel the admiration.

Well, you work on that gradient scale, and he will eventually come up to a point where he realizes that he can throw some imagination around on it and he's quite happy about it. But you want to work him until he's convinced that he's making the particle. That's your immediate — that's your immediate goal. So you put that down as you want to convince him he's making the particle.

On a neurotic level, which would be a Case Level VI, you haven't got a dog's chance of convincing him he's making the particle, so what do you do? You do the next-to-the-last list in Self Analysis. Case Level VI is ARC Straightwire. You leave Admiration Processing out of it.

And how about a Case Level VII, roaring psycho? He's there because somebody doesn't admire him. Believe me. They've admired — unadmired him clear back down into the past; and there he is, stuck. Well, let him find something pleasant in the present.

Don't stress admiration or particles or anything of the sort.

Now, let's go up to a Case Level V again. We find out that that is our first and primary goal. Now we can have a Case Level V admire blackness, but he'll get somatics. He'll really get somatics if he starts admiring blackness. We could have him do a thousand things. But this, that I've just given you, is a very optimum technique.

Now, you could have him admire perceptics, is your next level. If you've got popcorn, you have the popcorn pop and have him admire the sound it made, and then have it admire him for hearing the sound — I beg your pardon, I put that completely in reverse, I put it on an analytical level. You have him admire its silence, and you have it admiring him for that silence. You admire the silence, you admire the absence of communication. That's really wonderful, the absence of communication.

And sound, by the way, you know, is jammed on the track by explosions; because out in space and in vacuums and where there isn't air, the only time a person gets a perception of sound is when it is carried to him as an additional wave inside an electronic impulse. So he hears his sounds — the first time he ever heard sounds, or sounds got to him, or he was interested in sounds, was when they occurred in the middle of an explosion; and that quite commonly hurt him. So now he has sound around him all the time. You wonder why he's keyed in.

Now, you just mock up things that are perceptic and admire their silence and admire their imperfections, back and forth, back and forth, back and forth, back and forth.

Your next step there, that you should write down, is Admire the Imperfections of the Mock-ups. Admiring the imperfections of the mock-ups is very beneficial. It changes the mock-ups. And all this time you're doing anything with admiration, remember that you're running flows. Therefore your preclear can come right on down the line into heavy flows. He can come down to the level of sex and get admiration all mixed up with sex. He can run into blanketings, he can run into anything on the track. So you want to be very well aware of the fact that you can bog your preclear down like mad by just running flows. So try to keep it on a mock- up basis. And put that down: Just try to keep it on a mock-up basis. This doesn't say you're always going to succeed, but try to keep it on a mock-up basis.

Now, our create and destroy diagnosis is altered to this degree: We've got another part of it. Yes, you'll get your create and destroy diagnosis just as it's given on the tapes. Add another column. The nonadmiration column. Take your list of basic English and go over it on what he doesn't admire anywhere along the line; and you can by gradient scales coax him into getting an admiration flow on that subject, and you'll deaberrate him.

But don't take the rough ones first. When you're dealing with dynamite and you're carrying it from one point to another point, you generally try to carry it in loads that won't explode if you stumble and fall. You want it a couple of sticks at a time, sort of a thing. So don't go looking in the bank to find the biggest load you can find. Of course, your highest common denominator on this line is how horrible it is thataway. That's simple, isn't it? I mean, that's your highest common denominator is — on this flow — is admire how horrible it is over there. So all right, let's address this technique to getting somebody out of his body.

Now, on limited testing, this would go in this fashion, "Look around the room from inside your head. "

The fellow says, "I can't, it's all dark."

"Well, all right. Pick out some part of the room and admire how horrible it is there."

"Now get somebody else admiring how horrible it is there."

And in this way, just keep picking up sections of the universe and admiring how horrible it is or admiring how actual it is or admiring how actual the horror is. You put all those down: admiring how horrible it is, admiring how actual it is....

See, actual means "persisted." And persisted is "unadmired." So you see actuality is unadmired. That which we now have as actual is unadmired. That which is real is unadmired. You think this MEST universe is admirable: well, the truth of the matter is it's here because it's not — if you say it's not. Because up above this level we have what? Evaluation. And evaluation of whether it's wonderful or whether it isn't wonderful determines whether it's wonderful or whether it isn't wonderful. That's all, it's just judgment. It's adjudication.

"Thou shalt not judge" was addressed perhaps to some other meaning, but we could purloin the phrase now and say, "Thou must not evaluate on whether the thing is wonderful or not wonderful unless thou wantest to get yourself over in the wrong terminal." But again, that is — would be a terrible code of existence, wouldn't it? Well, the thing to do is just get clear so that you can admire anything or not admire it, and be ornery and mean and cross if you want to and, in other words, be free.

So you're not trying to compel anybody. And put this down, is inform your preclear that you're not trying to compel him to admire everything that goes on. He'll want to know if you are, sooner or later. And you tell him, "No. The purpose of that is to get you sorted out so that you can hate anything you want to.

All right. Your next step on this (and this is, by the way, a little technique all by its lonesome), it's Admiring the Horribleness technique. Get him to admire how horrible various internal parts of the body are. And if you want to relieve a chronic somatic he's got, just get him to admire how horrible and how actual it is. "Over there, in your knee." That's the chronic somatic.

Now, you just get him to admire how horrible it is inside that body, how messy it is. Admire how horrible it is, how horrible a mess of brains are. How horrible a mess of brains are. By the way, if you want people to shudder, throw a human brain and a couple of human kidneys out there on the street as people walk by. Well, don't for a moment suppose that this isn't intimately connected with your being in a body. You don't like to see brains lying around, do you? No, no. That's why.

I was down in a medical laboratory one time when I was a kid. Fellow came in there with a cancerous stomach, and he wanted it photographed. They had just taken it out of a stiff (I mean a corpse) and he wanted a photograph made of it there in the photo tab. And he was carrying this human cancerous stomach in his hand, dripping, and red gloves on and so forth, and it was all right until he put it underneath the ultraviolet photographic lamps. If you can imagine what that did to the appearance of that stomach and tissue! And the photographer promptly lost his lunch.

Well now, you see this stomach in a kind of a blue, dark light too. But just get that. You — there you know what kind of a terminal your preclear is up against. He's up against the inside of a body. He isn't going to look at it, any more than he'd go out here and appreciate and admire inspecting spattered brains. So just keep that in mind. Why is he in a body? It's because it's so horrible in there. And this gives you then a whole series of mock-ups of mocking up how horrible — admiring how horrible it looks in the body. Admiration for how horrible it is in the body.

Now, you can do this along another line: You can have him mock up brains; have him mock up tissue; have him mock up stomachs; have him mock up guts; have him mock up bones. In a good state of preservation, you understand.

"Just mock up some brains."

"All right. Now get how admirable those brains are."

And just get him admiring the parts of the body. And your boy will be outside.

Here you are, working — here's what you're working with. You're working with a case that analytically wants to do and be admirable. An admirable — wants to do admirable things and be an admirable thing himself. And reactively is being swept into the nonadmirable. And whatever he adjudicates to be nonadmirable, he will become. You get a young boy who was absolutely certain that admirals were absolutely no good may find himself at the end of his career as an admiral. Just happened that way.

Now, you'll find that this whole step of Step V, if run out all the way, would resolve everything there was to be resolved in the MEST universe. But at Step V we have this as a goal: We take the tension off withholding admiration. Just — we take the tension off no-flow. And our goal in doing this step is to get the person certain —

(1) certain that he can mock up admiration particles himself and that they then flow; and

(2) we take the tension off the subject of admiration in this universe.

And we have those goals, and those are all we do in Step V. If we do anything more in Step V we're — we just run out the universe out of our preclear.

Now, the cautions observed in this step are these: By so embarking upon a process so susceptible to flows, do not fall from there into running a case in terms of flows. Just because you use some flows in running Step V, don't then suppose and find out — because you will discover this to your great sorrow if you continue using flows — don't think that then we should use flows all the way out along the line. No, we want to use flows, if we have to use them, just to the extent where we don't have to use them anymore. We're getting him out of flows, but we are embarking on the whole idea of terminals.

Now, there is an additional technique which you can put down there: The admiration of the idea of terminals/The admiration of the idea that there are no terminals. To run that on a preclear, you would have to educate him a little bit as to what you were talking about when you talked about terminals. You would get him to admire the idea that there was a communication line with Mama, and so forth. Get him admiring communication lines.

Now, let me say something further as far as technique is concerned, along with that warning about getting into flows. I am not telling you that you cannot and must not use flows; you will very often find yourself slipping off into them. Don't slip too far is all I'm asking you, because you'll find your case will go down scale even though you apparently are getting off a lot of somatics and correcting a lot of things. This case may go very far down scale on you if you continue to use flows. And in Scientology 8-8008 you have a list of dichotomies and you have a subzero scale [pages 74-81, 1982 ed.]. You got the subzero scale there, and you have a list of dichotomies. You recall those there, in there. You mark this down, that you can run the subzero scale, plus and minus (that'd be Protect/Not-Protect, Hide/ Not- Hide, etc.), and all the dichotomies, by admiring the ideas or the objects to which they appertain. You could run the entire list of dichotomies and the subzero scale on one person. You could say "Mama." And now we go through the whole list of the dichotomies and we go through the positive and negative subzero scale. And boy, would we run out Mama! But we're liable to run the preclear way out the bottom, too. The reason why is because we're asking him to agree.

Now what's wrong with agreement? Because his agreement, in the past, was dedicated to how awful it was. So any time you start running agreement, you get how awful as the immediate follow-up on agree. So you get into flows, you get agree. In order to adjudicate that it was awful over there, some communication from or about over there had to arrive with the preclear, right? So he agreed. He had to have an inflow, and he agreed that it was awful. And now you start agreeing with flows, agreeing with flows. And the predominance of flows, all the aberrative flows anywhere on the track, are based on agreement. So you get agreement with the MEST universe as being an aberrative factor.

First agreement on the MEST universe is then restimulated when you start to run flows. You agreed it was awful, so you entered it. You see? You see why you don't run flows? There's why we minimize this agreement with the MEST universe. We start to run flows, we start to run agreement; agreement restimulates all the terminal idea. Then it restimulates all the places he's stuck, and it goes on from there. So it's not a good idea to run these flows, because flows are phooey.

But it is a good idea to get him into a position where he can mock up flows which really flow. That's what you want to do.

Theoretically, you could get to a point where the individual was so convinced of his ability to mock up admiration particles that he could mock up so many admiration particles that he would blow his whole bank. He would just blow the bank. However many years it is, forty years or seventy-four trillion, he would blow his bank.

Now, this applies to current life just as easily as it applies to whole track. Applies to electronics as well as it applies to anybody else. You'll find a person when he's caught in a past death is doing two things. He's saying, "I'm not here and I am here." He's saying, "How actual it is. It isn't true." He's saying those two things. Well, if you just admire things being nonactual and things being actual, and you just mocked this up on the track, and you kept him admiring and — the actuality and admiring the nonactuality of energies and situations, you would slip him into every one of his past deaths. If you just mocked up a steady flow of admiration in present time, his bank would sort of selectively run out. (I don't know in how many hours. I have not tested it, simply because it's too many hours.) But if you just mocked up lots of admiration flowing around him in present time — from in out, from out in; just mocked this up, flow, flow, flow, flow, flow, flow — he'd gradually run out. Why? Because everything that's in present time is there because it hasn't been admired. So if you just got admiration flows going everything would disappear, including himself.

Unfortunately, the GE probably wouldn't have enough sense to disappear totally or suddenly or gradually. He — probably his heart would disappear and he'd drop dead or something of the sort, if you did this. Understand that everything you're dealing with in connection with a body is actually solidified facsimile. And when you start to run out facsimiles, you could just as easily run a body out. A body is a heavy facsimile. There is no reason why you couldn't erase your hand. I give you that as a definite caution about flows. Because you could run flows hard enough, admiration flows hard enough in the area of the heart to make the heart disappear, theoretically. So let's go easy with this technique, huh? Let's get the preclear out and process him, not process this body and so on.

I want to add one more note this afternoon. I hope you've got there the substance of this technique. What you do that matches up and what I've given you there is very mechanical; you can do it very mechanically. You'll discover this note, you'll discover these closed terminals. That's one of the first things you will discover in processing. If you take the viewpoint of the fact that everything that's close up to something else is a closed terminal because there's nonadmiration there — just take that viewpoint — by the way, boy, does this agree with the early tone scale. Have we got agreement on the line now on Scientology. It's just all together. Is — hate, for instance, at 1.5 is hold. See, we've known this all the time: 1.5, hate, hold. If you hate a terminal, wssht! there you are, right up against it. You'll find if a fellow hated his father enough, he'll eventually become his father. All sorts of things like this happen.

Now as an additional note on this, you'll observe your flows and observe these terminals. You'll observe, any time you have an admiration, any time you have a life continuum, you will observe many computations existing on this. And let me assure you that none of those computations are important, except this computation: You have a closed pair of terminals.

A life continuum? Two terminals, closed. Why? Nonadmiration. Whatever else is in there doesn't matter. Those terminals are shut because of nonadmiration. It's just as though when you didn't permit a flow to run between two terminals that those terminals tried to close. And I'm not sure but that isn't how an electric motor operates, to tell you the truth. I rather think it operates because it's interrupted, not because it's connected.

You could say either one, but apparently both things are happening. The magnetism is interrupting the flow between two terminals, and the interruption of this flow between the two terminals tends to bring the two terminals together, and the action of bringing the two terminals together starts a current flowing. Because they won't come together; they're located on a base.

Now the individual who loses the power to handle terminals loses his power in the MEST universe, if he is even faintly depending upon terminals. So his dependency upon terminals is no good. And nevertheless a rehabilitation of this preclear depends upon his ability to relocate terminals and hold them solidly. We've proven this. This is one of those facts that keeps coming up and smacking one in the face. So terminals are closed together and are unmanageable, or preclears who cannot locate terminals and fix them and hold them easily are in kind of poor shape. They don't generate much energy.

Now, one other thing about the V, and you can make a note of this, is the two important things to run admiration on to bring the break points of his life out into full view (that is the points of his life where he went down scale) is admiration for his working and admiration for his pain. Pain. Admiration for his working and admiration for his pain. This is done — if you just had him mock himself up working and getting admired and so forth, the incidents which broke his life up are going to jump into view. And let me assure you that a V is so puzzled as to what happened to him that it is a good thing to let these things spring into view for this lifetime.

So you have this as — this as the technique which you use to reveal to him how he got that way. You don't have to explain it to him at all; all you have to do is get admiration for his working and admiration for his pain.

Now when you get admiration for the pain, by the way, you get the weirdest manifestation. The body of energy that was pain gets soft very quickly. You see, it's not as low scale as something as solid as a ridge. But the pain — the pain kind of blows up and gets sort of — it's a strange one. You'll recognize it. It's soft. It gets soft like a — I don't know, like a rubber ball or something of the sort. Like you press into the rubber ball. It's a feeling you get. And that softens up and goes away on the admiration of pain.

Now, you don't necessarily turn on all the somatics in a fellow's life just by having him admire pain. You don't necessarily turn on any somatics. But you do with this process, grimly so. Many of them. Therefore, you start running too many flows and you're going to turn on too many somatics. And you're going to be above the tolerance level of your preclear on such a thing.

Now, he's going to have the idea, for instance, that if you — he's going to have the idea that all these things exist in terms of an idea. That is to say, he's going to have the idea that he's got this terminal right close up against his face. He always knows it's been there. (He can't see, can he?) And he's going to get the idea that if he lets that go away from him — if you were to ask him to just pull that away from him — the idea or the action of pulling it away from him would repeat the pain he received when the line collapsed on him. Something collapsed on him and that made pain, so he's going to get the idea that if you suddenly stretched it out again he would get the pain back again. That doesn't happen to be true. All you have to do is mock up a communication line in between here, and it just simply stretches on out. Gets very soft, then very filmy — that is, flimsy — and then whoo! — gone. Because the two terminals are an idea.

But he's going to tell you all sorts of things, and he's going to give you all kinds of computations, and he's going to give you all kinds of explanations; and there's only two things that are important to him: the break points of his life. When did he go so bad at what time? Why was he sick at such and such a period? He's never been able to explain it to himself It's because he didn't get any admiration for work or admiration for pain. See? He didn't get any admiration there, and as a result he went boom! And he will see these points and he will say, "Well, well!"

Now, you don't have to tell him why this is. Don't evaluate for him. You run this technique, he will see it. Okay? So that reveals things to him on an analytical level and is often quite beneficial at a V level, because he would much rather think about it than he would run it. So you cure him of thinking about it by showing him why he went by the boards. And you just run this admiration for his work, and that generally practically cleans the whole thing up right there. He'll find out that there's a time when he worked as a little boy and didn't get paid. Simple as that.

You want to know why he's degraded? The loss of all this admiration is degradation. That's degradation. That's all there is to that. Because it's a level: admiration, pain, and below pain there's a sort of a sickness that's even worse than pain.

And very often he will get a line pulled away from him, you understand, that stretches these admiration particles, and that for some reason or other brings on that sickness. And so he feels degradation.

In other words he's been deprived of admiration suddenly, it's been torn away from him suddenly, and this resulting illness called degradation comes in on him. And he has — for instance, you get a Fifth Invader's hands. He'll get sick when he looks at those hands. Well, there's admiration's been torn away from him with relationship to those hands. So you just get hands admired and mock up hands and have other people admire them, and — I don't know, you can do all kinds of ideas and things with this.

But beware of running flows, beware of agreeing with the MEST universe. The reason you shouldn't agree with the MEST universe is not because the MEST universe is so bad, but merely because your preclear thinks it is. And you start agreeing with it, he of course is in the soup. That's why we've stressed that throughout these talks. I hope this straightens things out for you. Yes?

[from audience] Ron, wouldn't this new technique influence the GITA on Step IV as well?

Yes, very definitely. Very definitely. Nevertheless, it's very possible that a person will — you can't shoot the whole bank, and you've got to cure him of scarcity, for his benefit, of all kinds. But I'll tell you what this does do, as far as I can tell at this time. It shortens up the amount of GITA you have to give him, like mad.

Now, I can't give you any idea of how long it takes to crack a Case V, as an average, with this technique in your hands. I just can't give you any idea of that. I don't know. But I must say this: that, auditors, as time goes on here, are demonstrating greater and greater confidence and greater ability in handling cases. I actually am beginning to feel more confidence in auditors trained. They are getting results. Some of the cases which come across my desk, reports that come in — I always like to have case reports of the results being obtained by auditors, and reports from preclears (which is quite important because an auditor very often will overevaluate what he's done and the preclear will underevaluate it). But when you start getting reports from preclears about just sort of generally auditors are doing him good — he's had two auditors and they both did this — we know we're on pretty solid ground. We know we're on very solid ground.

Now you, I am sure, are coming up the line very, very well. There's one thing that one can never replace with just plain training, and that's experience — never. Experience is terribly important along this line, in spite of the fact that most of it goes down into flows and turns into automaticity. You have to look around and learn this, that the handling of aberration is not awful. Stay away from the psychos for a while, until you can practically shoot the bank for them. Just stay away from the subject of treating psychosis, because it is most fabulously unrewarded. I'm just thinking of the welfare of auditors.

And I'm also thinking about the fact that there are an awful lot of able people who need to be made much more able. Those are our goals — not just the treatment of psychosis. We've got psychosis techniques to treat psychosis. We've got psychosis actually in a box: it's backed up against a corner and surrendering, if we want to take it over. But do you know that I think group processing of psychotics — right at this moment not tested, not worth a nickel; but I've just got a hunch that this is going to take apart psychosis as a problem, with minimal strain on the auditor.

Now, let me say one thing about the auditor, in terms of admiration. You have no business whatsoever trying to get admiration from your preclear or being offended because he doesn't give you any. He's your preclear because he's short on the particle. Your processing should make him long on the particle. But anyone hearing this lecture can be absolutely sure of this fact, that he can mock up in terms of digestible particle more admiration in less time than the whole world of man could possibly consume in a thousand years. Your capability of doing that is very great. It is not a scarce particle.

So disabuse yourself very early in auditing of the scarcity of this particle, and you will immediately get rid of all restimulation with regard to preclears. You understand that?

Now you want to admire, too, how aberrated that preclear is. The things that are happening to him aren't awful. Do you know that an auditor can actually do this? He can consider how horrible that preclear's life is, how horrible it is, how horrible it is.

And what is this mechanism of going into somebody else's valence? You go into your own past, you know, because it is so horrible.

Well, theoretically you could process a preclear; and if you considered his past was so horrible and really so horrible, you know you could go into his past, as terminals? In other words, pick up his somatics and engrams.

Now there's the mechanism of restimulation. What business have you got being restimulated, knowing what you know? That's all. It's very easy. What business have you got?

Now you have two things then. You mustn't sit there saying "I am admiring it, I am admiring it, I am admiring…" No, no. Save your processing for when you get processed. Don't ever process yourself while you're running a preclear anyhow. Because why? Because you're going back down the time track in sympathy with him if you're doing it. Kind of a foolish thing to do, because it divides your attention.

Now if you find this thing happening, if you find yourself being restimulated or staying away from a preclear or refraining from auditing or being upset about auditing, you can give it this very solid diagnosis. You think you have, or you think there is, a scarcity of a particle called admiration. Do you see why that is? Because you think it can be horrible over thataway. It can't be horrible over thataway: you can always put enough admiration into an area to just straighten it out, zing zing! Particularly where you're concerned.

You don't have to go to bad terminals, you don't need bad terminals and it's not part of the mechanism of existence that we have to have bad terminals. Two good terminals work better than one good and one bad terminal. That's a fact. If you don't believe that, you get a couple of playwrights and they're working together and they write a great play; and you get one good playwright and one bad playwright and they're working together and they don't write a good play. That should tell you that these terminals is a very aberrated idea.

Well, we're fighting aberration. What are we fighting? We're fighting actually, basically, that idea — that there are things that mustn't be admired, and if you don't admire it you close with them. This gives you the appearance of attacking the MEST universe, you see? Gives you the appearance of attacking evil or absorbing evil. Gives a lot of computations. But on restimulation, on auditing, any time that you are restimulated by preclears or find yourself unwilling to process preclears, you have fallen into some sort of a belief that there is a scarcity of admiration. There must be a scarcity of a communication particle. So you'd better solve that with yourself.

And when you've solved that with yourself; when you're quite well aware that there's a tremendous abundance of admiration, and when you are very aware yourself that the very best quality admiration there is, is what you give yourself — the terminals you mock up and the flows you put between them, that that's the very best quality there is; actually it's right on your wavelength — why, when you know that very well, there is no case you couldn't crack, by the way, and practically nothing you couldn't do. So there is your road out as an auditor.

Now this is — we're making this the last lecture of a Professional Course series in earnest, and I hope that your Case Level V's, with their occlusions, crack easily on this level. I don't know how easily you will crack them or not crack them. I know you will crack them as easily as you follow down these various lines that I have given you. You'll follow them as easily and you'll crack them as easily as you know your subject. And there's no substitute for knowing your subject. None. No substitute for it.

And the only reason you will ever wander over and start wondering if action in future time as preached by the great god Thugwug… the only reason that you'll ever get into that is because you didn't know your subject. And I can point out all the way down the line in Dianetics, those that knew their subject are still in there pitching and they're still getting results — just like that. And it was only the guys who took a casual look and said, "Oh, I read all about this once in a psychology textbook published in 1701 in Spanish," and didn't bother to study it, it's only those that didn't get results so they didn't stay with Dianetics, so they had to look someplace else.

Now that sounds like it might be a very hard statement for me to make; it might sound rather didactic. However, it doesn't happen to be based on my opinion. It happens to be true. This is borne out uniformly through all the training schools and all the training experience which we've had in Scientology and Dianetics. The fellow that knew his subject got results, and the fellow who didn't know his subject had to wander off somewhere else. And they did that.

I don't know what percentage of auditors of the early days are still in there pitching. We saw one here last night. He was a raving psycho when I first saw him, climbing the walls. I processed him years ago. And there he is wearing the uniform of an officer of his country. Of course, he's sort of wandering off into other fields and he doesn't know, and a lot of things; of course, that guy probably never will know. But the point is, look at the difference. Look at that.

So if you don't think there's success up and down the line, you just haven't looked. And what he got that squared him around was Standard Operating Procedure, Dianetics: Modern Science of Mental Health, July 1, 1950. And it cracked his case. You're very, very rich in techniques, you're very rich in past experience, and the only dirty trick you can play on yourself is not to know and have in good array the data you have been presented here. That's really the only dirty trick you can play on yourself or actually on anybody. We've been getting very, very good results, and we have had very good students. I'm very proud of what the students are doing that went through the first course of this series. With a lot less than you have, those guys are really in there pitching. They're doing all right. Two of them particularly: they're mopping everything up. (They're the ones you don't hear from, by the way. They're too busy.)

Now, I hope that you can hang up even a very much more enviable record than that, much more enviable. We have turned loose now technologies and a form of presenting Scientology, in the Group Auditor's Course, which is capable of bringing in a great many preclears and a great deal of public interest. And it is in the interest of a professional auditor to himself also be a group auditor and to interest people in group auditing. And I look on every professional auditor as a potential source of audited groups. If he does that, he cannot fail in preclear procurement.

If that is his worry, he cannot fail. It is only that one who does not give, who does not receive.

And we have a form now where an auditor without any embarrassment whatsoever can go out and do an awful lot of public good. He could organize a small group of adults as far as that's concerned, and he would find himself called on for odd bits of processing. He'll probably find himself putting in at least ten or twelve hours of professional processing a week. Very adequate pay, if you charge the rates you should charge.

So we've got a line running here, things have never looked so good, we have a stability that can only be destroyed if we kind of forget about it. There's — you will find all sorts of rumors floating around that everything is going wrong. People have been finding rumors for the last three years that everything was going wrong. I have been mentioned as having been this and that; and the last rumor that was going around, by the way, that I have just been shot. These rumors have been tearing around at high velocity for three years. It's very interesting. I'm still here; I never felt better. And their — the idiocy of them that people will absorb and believe has been the most striking education which I have had in the last three years. That has been what has really been amusing.

What can be passed on and believed? Well, the reason for that is of course the nonadmirable terminal. Somebody could come in and say, "The HAS just landed a contract to process the entire British army." And somebody could come in and say, "Hubbard just ran over a small girl with a car and left her lying in the gutter." And when the person walked on to the next person they would say, "Hubbard ran over a small girl with a…" Unfortunately, horribly true. Of the two data, man is rigged to pick up the bad one.

So just remember that when you're carrying on with this and when you're evaluating along the line. You want to know why people tell you bad news, bad news, bad news, bad news, bad news? They want it to be admired so it'll run out. Look at the pet stories of somebody, and you will find out that they're chunks of bad news and they're asking you to admire them. And so instead of sitting there and saying, "Oh, that's terrible, that's terrible," you say, "Gee, you get into lots of trouble!" and you'll see the most astonishing thing happen to him and his story.

Okay, that's all Good afternoon.