VALIDATION PROCESSING

A lecture given on
27 June 1951

Reinforcing the Preclear's Analytical Mind

I am going to go over a type of processing with which you may be familiar already, but I think
the extent to which this processing will go might startle you. It probably won't startle you till
you start to use it.

There is evidently a thing called theta. Theta gets enturbulated-gets mixed up with too much
MEST and so forth-and becomes entheta. And theta has a very funny manifestation: A little
bit of theta will attack entheta and try to drive it out. They are opposite polarities.

Entheta will try to attack theta and drive it out. This is actually a death mechanism we are
working with, but it is also a survival mechanism.

If a fellow comes around who has a lot of free theta and sees things badly disorganized, his
hands just itch until he can start bringing organization to it. That disorder, of course, is entheta.
When it gets organized and nicely aligned it becomes theta.

Now, the amount of theta which that person tries to put into the thing gets kicked back against
by the disorder, and he gets enturbulated too, to a certain degree. But theta will follow the
natural law of attacking entheta. They attack each other, definitely.

In the business of living you will very often find a theta person matched up with an entheta
person; they are partners in business or some such thing. Actually, they can be joined up in
several ways. The theta partner, who is well above 2.0, is providing the amount of theta
necessary for the below-2.0 person to survive. But the below-2.0 person is bringing death in
small quantities and failures and so forth to the upper-tone-scale person. Furthermore, you will
find the entheta person attacking, one way or the other, the theta person. There doesn't have to
be any wide framework of cause or reason; there isn't any apparent cause to it. A lot of causes
are stated: "I'm doing this because . . ." and then there are twenty-five specious reasons on the
part of the entheta person. But the entheta person simply will attack a theta individual.

An entheta society will attack a theta subject-inevitably.

The theta comes in over an entheta area and tries to damp out and convert the entheta; the
entheta will move over to a theta area and try to enturbulate the theta. There is a constant
conflict going on between these two substances.

Naturally, if you take 1.9 entheta and 2.1 theta, they are so close together on the tone scale that
they are practically mingling. But you take 1.1 entheta and 3.0 theta, and they will really come
together and try to mix up-one trying to do one thing, the other trying to do the opposite. The
entheta says "Succumb!" to the 3.0, and the 3.0 says to the 1.1 entheta, "Live! Get organized,
get reasonable."

Most of the arguments that you will run into could be resolved-as far as you, who are
wondering why those two people are arguing, are concerned- just by looking at the two
people who are arguing and at how they stand on the particular subject about which they are
arguing. You will find out that it is probably theta hitting entheta one way or the other, because
theta will go into agreement with theta at its approximate tone level, and entheta will go into
agreement with entheta.

Of course, it will try to go just a little bit further: entheta, being entheta anyway, turns all MEST
into enMEST and disorganizes everything, and it is going happily down toward succumb



anyway. So theta and theta going together reinforce survival, but entheta and entheta going
together, although they are in perfect agreement, agree that what we have to do is succumb.
The only way they keep a balance, then, is entheta and theta going one against the other-an
interactive principle.

This does not depend on reason; it can be demonstrated. There is almost a laboratory
demonstration of this possible.

Someone asked a little boy, "Do you remember somebody in the fourth grade that you liked a
lot?"

The little boy thought for a moment and said, "Oh, yeah-that Billy Jones. He's a good boy; I
had a lot of fun," and so on.

"Can you remember somebody in the third grade that you liked a lot?"

"No, but I sure remember one that I hated. Oh! I hated that boy!"

This doesn't become significant, perhaps, until you see the frequency with which it happens.
You go into a deposit of theta and release a little bit of that theta and the next thing it does is
attack entheta.

This is Validation Processing. What you are actually trying to do is build up a sufficiently high
potential of theta in the case in order to get the entheta attacked almost automatically and
knocked flat. The skill involved on the part of the auditor is in letting a high enough potential
build up, and in working with the preclear until that high potential is built. He can build a high
enough potential of theta on the thing to bring a person right on up the tone scale, and the
person will get up out of the band where he will attack entheta. In other words, instead of 3.0,
the preclear can get up to 3.5 or 4.0, and low levels of entheta which are very far down and
close to death and so forth can then be ignored. However, if you take a normal and pick up just
a little bit of theta here and a little bit of theta there, the next thing you know, he will crash right
straight into the entheta of the case.

It is hard to keep people out of it. You watch this; maybe for the first session or two this person
can run theta moments without skidding badly, and then he is liable to go straight into entheta.

Now, if you can build up a high enough bolt of lightning, a high enough "wattage" of theta,
you can just knock the entheta on the case galley-west. But if you don't build up very much
theta, of course that theta that you have just gotten free from the case will tear right back in and
get itself enturbulated again.

The most ambitious thing in the world is a little bit of theta. It sure gets ambitious. And it is a
funny thing, but there has to be a considerable volume of theta before it can ignore entheta. So,
if you get a considerable volume of theta it actually will ignore entheta, because if the entheta
comes anywhere in its vicinity, the entheta straightens out and becomes theta.

Theta coming in the vicinity of a large deposit or a large amount of entheta will become entheta.
Entheta coming into the vicinity of a very much larger amount of theta will become theta.

The reason you have to go over an engram time after time after time is that you have so
doggone little theta to invest that it takes many times over an engram to erase it. You understand
that your time span is stretched when you are running an engram. If you had a lot of theta
available when you started to run that engram, it would go out quickly.

We are getting into something which has a measurable potential. I hope one of these fine days
somebody measures it. It is sitting right there. Here is a whole universe full of stuff for
somebody to look over. But regardless of that, we don't at this time have to know that much
about it, its structure and anatomy, to know how to do Validation Processing.



Most auditors go at a case as a theta unit, and what do they naturally attack? They attack
entheta. The preclear looks like entheta to them, the preclear looks like engrams; they attack the
engrams, the secondaries and the locks. If your auditor was up around 4.0 he wouldn't do this.
He would sort of smooth out this preclear and all of a sudden dust him off and the fellow
would be sane. They used to do this with faith healing-just say, "God bless you, my child,"
and the fellow would stand up and walk away. We are not that good. So it requires a
considerable amount of restraint on the part of the auditor-an educational restraint-for him to
build up any kind of potential at all in the preclear, because the auditor will find himself sitting
there with a sixteenth of an erg of theta, and he gets enthusiastic and takes the two cents' worth
of theta he finds on the case and dives for basic-basic or a big secondary. That little bit of theta
goes in there-it's perfectly willing-and gets crushed by an overwhelm of entheta.

After the auditor has done this a few times he starts to get a little bit leery of what he invests.
Before this time, we didn't realize thoroughly what we were doing in terms of investment-and
it is investment. An auditor has to be a very good investment banker if he starts playing around
with Validation Processing.

Your preclear starts to get the idea after a while, but at first when he starts to run through some
pleasure moments-just starts to run through some pleasure moments, scanning-he will go
right off the line into entheta: "No, I can't remember a time when I was happy, but here is this
time when . . ." and so on.

You say, "Let's remember something pleasant now."

"Well, all right." So he goes along and builds up a little more theta, and then he crashes into the
entheta again.

You take a case that is pretty low on the tone scale and you have a terrible struggle. In the first
place, it is an awful struggle trying to find what was considered to be a pleasure moment; that is
a tough struggle right there. You will play around with just giving the guy the idea of what you
want, and if you give him the idea that that's what he wants, he will invest that thought. It's not
even his own theta, but he will invest it!

You never saw such profligate investment in your life as what a preclear will make when he is
fairly low on the scale.

You will occasionally run into somebody who has terrific engrams on the manic level about
being happy, and you start to scan pleasure moments and the whole thing will reverse on you.
You will find yourself scanning over stuff that you shouldn't be monkeying with. You are
really scanning entheta that has represented itself as theta, and you scan this for a while and the
preclear gets unhappier and unhappier.

So entheta can be in many guises.

Validation Processing is called so for another reason. There is a principle of postulating a
reality with creative imagination: That reality will come to pass which is most agreed upon and
postulated for the future. If lots and lots of people agreed that something was going to happen
in the future, the chances are it would happen. This is not very esoteric. If we suddenly agreed
that the great thing to do would be to paint the front of the Foundation a bright purple-if we all
agreed on it-one of these days I suppose that it would be bright purple. That is postulating a
future reality.

Now, if you postulate a creative reality for the future, there is a better chance that the future will
have in it a creative reality. If you postulate gloom, unhappiness and bad tidings or war with
Russia for the future, chances are that is what is going to happen. If everybody in the United
States agrees that the future isn't worth living anyhow and so on (this is lower-tone-scale



stuff), they are of course 0.5 and they are agreeing that the thing which is going to happen is
death.

You as an auditor are really practicing and playing with this principle. You can say if you want
to, and seem to feel, that your preclear is going to be sane, happy, cheerful and well and so on,
and then all you do-doggone it-is pay attention to his reactive mind! You seem to be
agreeing that sanity is what you want from your preclear, but what you are validating is his
reactive mind.

Of course, you are playing the same trick of attacking entheta-theta attacking entheta-and
you naturally attack the entheta and try to disenturbulate it.

There is nothing wrong with doing that unless the amount of free theta on the case is too slight
to be invested. So Validation Processing actually occupies the sector up to about 1.5. Above
1.5 it starts to lose efficaciousness; it isn't as effective above that level. You don't get this
sudden chain lightning response.

With very low-tone-scale people and people that are hard to work and so on, you really have
gold in your hands with this Validation Processing-if you have enough restraint yourself to
work it out. It requires restraint.

For instance, the fellow starts running into theta moments but then he says, "I've got a terrible
headache."

Your immediate training-pattern response is to say "Who said that? (snap!)" But that is also
your mechanical response as theta, tackling the entheta in him.

Now, on upper-tone-scale processing you have enough theta between you to really do
something about the case. The preclear and the auditor, together with the group theta, can
process the devil out of this case and just really roll it along. But down in the lower band of the
tone scale, frankly, the amount of theta which has to be brought into being before you can do
some good, effective processing is considerable.

So what do you do? You validate the analyzer. You refuse to have any truck with anything
which is not accepted as good reality by the preclear. You validate the analytical mind, you
validate the reality level. You don't want reality which the preclear does not accept as reality.

You notice in the lower bands of the tone scale that when you snap your fingers at him and he
repeats a phrase he is not hearing this phrase. He does not even have a sonic impression on it.
It just occurs to him, he repeats it sort of weirdly and maybe it turns on a boil-off, maybe it
does all sorts of strange things, but he doesn't know where it came from. You can get a file-
clerk response from him and he will say, "That's Papa," but that is not reality to him. So, in
using Validation Processing, you maintain a level of reality no lower than that which is readily
accepted as real by the preclear. You maintain this level of reality-"Does it seem real to you?"
"Lets go to a moment that really seems real to you now," "Let's contact something which
seems very right, that you know happened"-and he will start giving you things that he knows
happened. Sometimes he even comes up to the point of knowing he is sitting on the couch.
Sometimes that is where you have to start! "Let's find something real."

When processing present time for a very low-level, well spun-in case, you sometimes have to
look around the environment and check various items in the environment until you find one
item that seems real to that preclear. All of a sudden he is liable to say, "Why, yes, the light
switch seems real to me. The wall doesn't, but the light switch-that's real."

You start from there. At that moment you have picked up a theta line, so you follow it through.
"What else is real?"

"Well, your suspenders. You're not, though."



Now I'm talking about the extreme case; this is Present Time Processing. Don't plunge this
case into something which he can't credit as real himself, because the case will stay static or get
worse; doing that, you are just stirring up the entheta and making more and more entheta.

Your ARC with the preclear and the theta body which you compose as a group have been
forgiving you a large number of sins. ARC-the theta of the auditor and the theta which is
attracted into that group-has been masking by its existence a number of sins on low-level
cases. In other words, you had quite a bit that you could get away with without recognizing
that it was a wide latitude and that you were getting away with something.

If you really want this preclear up the tone scale, however, you just assume that this ARC is
there and then operate as though it isn't-which is to say, you want levels of reality, levels of
affinity and levels of communication which he knows were affinity, which he knows were real
and which he knows were communication.

Understand that seeing a light switch is a communication. If he is really seeing this light
switch-it seems real to him, there is something between him and this light switch-it is
probably representative of some pleasant environ in his past and therefore is duplicating itself to
him. So you have picked up just that much of some former theta incident in the present time
environment and you start building up a potential.

One of the interesting things about this is your preclear is liable to break out in tears or
something when you run it. You give him just a little tiny bit of theta and then with great
ambition it goes right into the entheta, and he starts to cry.

Now, you have seen where you can't get the secondary off a preclear and he just sits there and
so on, until you take him back to the time when he was really happy with Papa as a little boy.
He has Papa's death sitting there on the track and you are not able to approach it. But we start
running theta moments about Papa and we run more pleasant incidents about Papa and more
about Papa, and all of a sudden, without any command or anything else, we go right straight
into the entheta of Papa's death. It is almost a lead-pipe cinch that that is going to happen.

There is an example of this which you have seen, but believe me, that is a very limited scope
compared to what this processing will do. You actually will have the feeling, after you have
processed somebody for a while, that you really are fighting with the case a little bit, because
this guy starts wandering all around Robin Hood's barn. He starts getting into entheta and you
keep trying to pull him out of it.

Actually, the final definition of processing is that you are trying to get all these attention units
up to present time. You are trying to get everything up to present time-that is, in the way of
good, clean attention units. You don't want any entheta out of the bank up in present time, you
want all this theta up in present time. How are you going to get it there? You have to pull it up,
scrap by scrap, erg by erg, and you will finally achieve it. That, really, is processing. You can
redefine processing with that definition: trying to get all of the theta attention units in present
time.

If you are able to do that, by the way, you will notice some remarkable manifestations. Have
you ever come into present time after blowing up a large amount of entheta and suddenly taken
a look and had everything seem very bright to you? That is ARC up; your ARC is on much
more heavily so your communication with the environ tunes way up. It gets very bright.

That is the way the world looks to a little kid. That is just simply the matter of having enough
free theta in present time to make the proper connections. It is that simple.

If you tackle processing from this angle on low-tone-scale people, you will find yourself
collecting some dividends. How far this will go, I don't know. I can't tell you that. I only
know that it produces results. How many ways this principle can be used, I don't know. I do



not have large numbers of completed cases to show you on this, so I am offering you this-it
is in advance of other methods-merely because it has proven very useful on low-tone-scale
people.

I am not giving it to you as a technique which stands head and shoulders above this and that.
Our new line of technique development may go out along this theta-entheta principle line, and it
may not. But handling low scale people has been a terrific problem.

You can evidently damp out engrams in restimulation using Validation Processing without ever
looking at the engrams. That is a nice trick. Of course, it requires from you an enormous
amount of restraint. For instance, you are running a preclear on an analytical-incident chain
about cars and he says, "Oh, I've got this terrible backache."

And you say, "Let's go back to the last time that you had a nice ride in the car, and so on;
you're enjoying the scenery."

"Yeah, I see one."

"Remember the time you kissed the girl in the car?"

"Yeah! Yeah, gee, I was happy that day!"

"Now, remember the time you got the new car?"

"Yeah."

"Remember the time you gave a car to somebody, or gave them a ride." "Oh yeah, I remember
that time."

"Where's your backache?"

"Gee, I don't know!"

You don't either! But I will tell you this: You could really fix him in this backache. You are
running him on theta moments when all of a sudden he starts to get this backache, and you say,
"What's the phrase connected with this backache? (snap!)''

So he says, "Ah, `I have to go back."'

"Now, who's talking?"

"Oh, I don't know; it's a phrase."

"Well, just go ahead and repeat it."

Then he repeats himself into a heavy boil-off that lasts till the end of the session. You are
running him at zero reality level and he will probably have the backache from there on out! He
might not have; it might go away and merely leave a great big lock on the time track.

So check your cases sometimes and find out how many of these enforced boil-offs have left
locks on the time track, which, when your preclear runs through them, will boil again.

You may think you are producing a tremendous amount with a tremendous amount of boil-off,
but you may just be littering up his track, too. If the case is pretty entheta and you keep
insisting on running entheta, there is no theta present to knock that stuff off the track and
disenturbulate it, so you just deposit it in various portions of the track. You just keep placing it
here and there on the track and spread it around and get the backaches on and the headaches on
and the chronic stomach somatics on and so forth. You can keep that up for a long time.



Now, two things could actually be happening on this Validation Processing; maybe both of
them happen, maybe only one. You are searching for a tone level which is above the tone level
of the somatic, and you manage to finally, one way or the other, establish the tone level. That is
one explanation. That tone level is above the sympathetic vibration level of the engram. This
engram could have a 1.1 tone, and your preclear is in its sympathetic band of 1.1 so he gets the
backache. But if you can somehow or other bump him up the tone scale by running theta
moments, he will just climb out of the resonance area of that backache and it will stop.

The other thing that may be happening is that the theta is tackling the entheta and actually
knocking it flat-actually kicking it off. One or the other is happening. I am sure that one of
these fine days somebody will be able to stand up and say with certainty which it is. These are
two perfectly good postulates and two perfectly good explanations for the same manifestation.

It so happens, though, that the alertness level of the person comes up. But this could also be
explained by the fact that you are turning on analyzer rather than turning on reactive mind.

What you are doing with Validation Processing is invalidating the reactive mind. So the guy
has got phrases, so he has got engrams, so he has got secondaries, so he is sad-so what? We
want to know how well he can think. All we are interested in is his analyzer, his good health,
his agility, his cheerfulness, his happiness, his effectiveness, and that is all we keep asking for
and talking to him about, and the only things we will buy off him are these things. The analyzer
waxes fat on this; analytical power turns up and he climbs up the tone scale.

That is validation. Behind this is a very definite principle: That state of being comes into being
which is demanded or commanded to be by the auditor. The auditor can call into being any state
of being he wishes in the preclear; that would be another way of saying it. It may be too
generalized- the auditor can't make him into an angel-but it is pretty much true.

In interpersonal relationships, if you validate the orneriness, crabbiness, meanness and
ugliness of another person consistently and continually, he will be what he is validated to be.
And you know that by experience, I know.

If you validate that he is happy, that he is cheerful, that he is sunny, that he is in wonderful
shape and so on, those portions of his being which are those things will begin to manifest
themselves. It doesn't necessarily mean that you have knocked out the other portions, but you
have called into being and made predominant those things.

This could be explained simply and plainly on the postulate of resonance. You have just lifted
him up the tone scale to a point where the lower-tone-scale manifestations simply don't
resonate. The lower levels of the tone scale are very harsh and ugly and a lot of other things,
but you don't pay any attention to those; you just keep putting out a vibration level which is in
the upper band of the tone scale and asking for things which are high on the tone scale. The
first thing you know, you have the upper tone scale in resonance, the fellow's analyzer goes
on, he thinks and he is effective and happy.

That could be a full explanation for this, except for one thing-a manifestation of theta which
you see in using Validation Processing. You try to keep the preclear on pleasure moments and
you get just so many of them, and then the case dives.

You start this Validation Processing, getting up theta, and the fellow starts up the tone scale.
You work him for two or three sessions, he keeps coming up that tone scale, and all of a
sudden you have a 3.5. The next session you bring him up to 4.0, and for a whole hour after
the session he is 4.0. Then all of a sudden he dives to the bottom; he goes down to his normal
0.5. That is no exaggeration; you can watch this happening.

The fortunate part of it is that if he starts out at 0.5 and gets boosted by Validation Processing,
session after session, clear up to 4.0, when he does his dive he will come back to about 0.6.



Then you boost him all the way up to 4.0 again, and he spins again, but stops at 0.8. You
finally get him up to a point where he will be covertly hostile toward you!

One could postulate that what is happening here is a very simple thing: The preclear is simply
climbing up the tone scale and getting a big preponderance of free theta, and his present time
environment is absorbing it all. Then suddenly in goes a valence wall, out goes a circuit. In
other words, you get too much free theta on there and the fellow goes around feeling grand and
everything; you have actually, by being very patient yourself, built up lightning in this person's
skull, and all of a sudden it goes crash! What happens is that a whole circuit or a whole series
of circuits will collapse and he just goes down because he is suddenly flooded with entheta. All
of his thought processes go unclear, his analyzer shuts down and the reactive volume goes way
up.

With Validation Processing you don't touch circuits and you don't touch valences. You don't
ever tell him to get in valence because that would be to infer that he could get out of valence.

The preclear keeps saying to you, "But I'm way out of valence."

You say, "Okay, that's fine. Let's go to the time you had an all-day sucker."

"Well, I can't even taste the thing!"

"All right, all right. Let's go to a time when you could!"

There is the sequence of events. You can see this sort of thing happening, you can watch this
sort of thing happening, and believe me, you can really get a preclear going over the roller
coasters. Actually, with Validation Processing, you will see more changes in a preclear than
you see in standard processing, and yet you apparently aren't hitting any entheta. You are
trying to keep away from that.

If you get too much theta up there and the already existing valence wall gets this tremendous
amount of free theta up against it, all of a sudden that valence wall crashes. (It has been a lot of
trouble to you as an auditor, because every time you sent the preclear back down the track he
went into a dog's valence and started to bark like a dog.) But all it is now is entheta; it isn't a
valence any more. It is simply the entheta and everything connected with it, and it just floods.
The preclear gets terrifically depressed; a lot of this theta suddenly enturbulates. But there was
enough potential to knock apart the valence. So what you have now is a person who is just
kind of occluded instead of supervalenced. Now you start back up the tone scale until you get
him up to somewhere around 3.0. You can't tell when one of these things is going to explode
either. They explode very remarkably.

Validation Processing requires an even lower level of authoritarianism in auditing than entheta
processing. This is processing theta. It seems to set up a sort of an automatic cycle.

Frankly, I would like very much to have worked many more cases than I have worked on
Validation Processing before giving it to you. I'm giving it to you here because it is valuable,
not because it has been tested out to the degree it has. As a matter of fact, it has not been tested
now on more than about fifteen cases that I know of, which is a very small series, particularly
since those cases were not carried through a large number of hours.

But we know what it does to some degree, and we also know that you can really improve a
case. For instance, take a preclear who is in terrible shape at ten o'clock; he gets Validation
Processing for an hour, and at eleven o'clock he is sitting up and taking nourishment and ready
to go. That is a heck of a thing to be able to do to a human being.

A person, to do good Validation Processing, has got to know and keep in mind more about
Dianetic mental structure than otherwise. A person could do it blind; he could actually fumble
through somehow and do it blind. But unless he knew thoroughly the behavior of locks,



secondaries and engrams, unless he could be prepared at any moment to pick one of these
things up and discharge it in some fashion, and unless he could do something for this case, he
really should not play around too much with Validation Processing because it is chain
lightning.

It is not a process that you would turn over to a book auditor for the simple reason that it would
perplex him so. He wouldn't know what he was fooling with! He starts auditing his mother on
it, and he runs this and he runs that and he runs something else, and "Mama is so happy now
after I've done all this, and isn't this fine, and look how happy Mama is!" So he goes out to the
other room and says, "Hey, George, come in here and see how happy I've made Mama," and
she is sitting there with tears streaming down. You wouldn't be able to put this processing
across to somebody who didn't know his basics. It is very important to know them.

For instance, if you ever find a preclear who has suddenly dived into a secondary automatically
and is busy running the thing, you had better run it out. If you can get tears off the case, real
tears off the specific incident with the preclear going into it automatically, you run it out.

I'm talking now just about tears and terror and apathy as three types of secondaries that I would
really dive for. If the preclear walked into one of those things automatically and he was there in
the incident, believe me, I would run it! Because there is where you are going to get a lot of
relief on the case quickly. That is really why you are fishing with Validation Processing.

But just because a guy goes into some yawns, just because he goes into boil-off, just because
he goes into some other manifestation, or because he is merely angry is no reason to go after
the entheta.

For instance, the preclear is sore as the devil, and the more of these theta moments you run, the
madder he gets. And he can't tell you what he is mad about; you are not even asking him what
he is mad about. He is obviously not sitting in a specific incident because he is not talking
about a specific incident or specific thing.

As you build up more and more theta, though, you might get him to say, "Well, Uncle Bill was
a dog-that's all there is to it-when he beat me with that club!"

So you would say, "And where did he hit you?" and you would run off this anger secondary.
But the thing would be there and obviously ready to be run. You wouldn't have even asked
him to go to the incident. If he will go to the incident automatically, if he is there, if he will run
it automatically, gorgeous! You sit there then as a good auditor and audit it. You don't just let it
sit.

Sometimes you will get line tears; don't mistake line tears for incident tears. You are running
pleasure moments and this person can't tell you what he is crying about or anything and yet he
is just crying. You are getting a grief line charge, and it will come off as a line charge; it will
come off as tears.

I have tried to explain this several times and I have watched auditors work after it has been
explained to them. They run pleasure moments, pleasure moments, pleasure moments, pleasure
moments, and then all of a sudden the preclear gets an earache. Immediately the auditor says,
"Where does it come from? How old are you? (snap!) Is there a phrase that goes with this?
(snap!)"

That is wrong. You don't even run pleasure moments. You are used to running pleasure
moments. Now change your mind about that. What you should be running is analytical
moments. This gives you a tremendous scope of incident. You are running analytical moments,
and you are running them by Straightwire, as single incidents, and as chains of locks; those are
the three ways to run them.



You will find, after your preclear gets up to the point where he can lock-scan, that you will get
the most free theta up the quickest with Lock Scanning. But on a lot of preclears down at the
bottom of the line, when they start up that chain they just crunch into the entheta.

It is very interesting how fast they will stop on that. For example, take somebody who was
ordinarily and daily beaten unconscious by Papa, and just start scanning Papa. We don't scan
Papa doing something to him, because he is not sure that Papa ever did. Let's just scan the
times when he knows Papa was there or he has some sort of an idea it was Papa-anything
analytical about Papa: any time he was thinking about Papa, any time he saw Papa, any time he
went on a trip with Papa and so on. What you do is just take the theta tied up in Papa and put it
back into this incident and it will try to run itself. Now, how do you get him out of that? If he is
too low on the tone scale he will latch up right there with Papa beating the devil out of him
unless you can find some more Papa. If you go on and find some more analytical moments
about Papa, this may merely dissipate as an incident and seem to just blow of its own accord.
Only you have never gotten him spanked. This depends on your finding some more about
Papa.

But if you get this fellow too low on the tone scale, his free theta/entheta ratio is such that he
will actually hang up in the incident. Then you have to go looking for somebody who looked
like Papa or you have to go get something that is vaguely associated with anything: "Let's take
a look at your house when you were a boy."

"Well, I . . . you know, I never can see the inside of this place."

"Okay. I'm not asking you to see the inside. Let's just take a look at the shrubbery."

"Well, all right. Sure, I can see some of the shrubbery. There's a tree. Yeah, an old tree over
there I used to crawl up in."

"What did the front door look like?"

"Oh, so-and-so and so-and-so."

"And where were the water taps located around it?"

"Oh, such-and-such, so-and-so."

"How many chimneys did it have?"

"Well, so-and-so" and so on. The first thing you know, the fellow is saying, "Yeah, and there
was oatmeal paper in the living room, and Papa used to sit in that rocker. Say, its a funny
thing, Grandma used to sit over in that rocker too."

Of course, there is just the empty rocker sitting there, and he wouldn't put Grandma in it-not
now!

He goes on, "Yeah, and here's all the times I had to haul wood for the fire. And my father used
to say to me . . . Boy! He was mean to me. Gosh! he's a . . ."

"Now, who else used to sit in the rocking chair?"

He is starting right into the entheta; you have just gotten up that much theta. Of course, he
looked at that house many times when he was cheerful and pleased and so forth, and you get
him to describe the confines.

If you find, for instance, that your preclear is unable to approach a telephone conversation
which told him some bad news or something of the sort, just start running telephones. Get him



to spot where the phone was in every house or office he ever had. You don't run anybody
talking on it; that is too dangerous. What you want is just where all the phones were.

Obviously these are analytical moments; you don't consider these pleasure moments. They are
analytical moments of where the phones were. We pick up these phones, we pick them up two
or three times, then we try to pick up a phone bell. Even if he doesn't have any sonic, we pick
up "A phone bell rang there; and one rang there. Oh yes, I had a funny phone bell over at this
other place," and so on.

Then you say, "Do you remember a time when you were a little boy and talked on the
phone?"-sneaking it in.

"Yeah."

"Do you remember two or three other phone conversations?"

"Yeah. There was the time Aunt Mamie told me to come out to the farm, and-gee, my head
feels awful bad!"

You would make a mistake at that point if you just started to grab for what you were after,
because it has just come into view; the theta is too ambitious. You can make that as a rule; theta
is going to jump before it is ready to jump.

So pick up some more phone bells, and pick up some more phone calls. If you do it well the
incident will disappear and you won't have to handle it anymore.

The avidity with which a little tiny bit of theta will spring is tremendous, and that is where you
have to exercise great willpower and caution about what you pick up.

You work with the file clerk and, in the absence of a file clerk, your own good sense on this.
You don't start picking up stuff which is obviously on the aberrated line. You can be very
selective with Validation Processing.

There is a patter which goes along with this. If you have a file clerk that you can work with,
you ask, "Is there a chain ready to be run? (snap!)"

"Yes."

"What is the name of this chain? (snap!)"

"The cat-whisker chain," or something of the sort. This is just straight patter.

Now, ordinarily you would take off from there with Lock Scanning. You would simply take
off from there and start to run all the entheta on that chain. Not with Validation Processing; you
run everything on that chain which is analytical and which he knows has a good level of reality.
You just scan, in other words, the analytical side of that chain.

You could postulate that, although this chain looks to you like a straight line of incidents,
actually the chain probably is two broken chains of incidents. One line would be reactive areas,
and the other one would be analytical areas.

If you keep paying attention to the reactive one, you are just going to bring him further and
further into reactive-mind reaction. He is going to get more and more reactive about this unless
he has enough theta available to run it, at which time he will run it right on out and desensitize it
and feel much better for it. But that means he has to have enough theta to do it.

So, on a low-scale case, if you start chewing away and plowing away at this reactive side of
the chain you will latch him up. Keep him over on the analytical side of the chain and start



turning his analyzer up further and further, and some of the incomprehensible problems on the
chain that were incomprehensible before to a tuned-down analyzer will try to resolve
themselves and try to pull over into the analytical side of the chain.

Your stunt as an auditor is to keep him over on the analytical chain and not let him go into the
reactive chain. Willy-nilly, sometimes he will boil off; very often he will boil off. You let him
boil off. Very often he will shed a couple of tears; he doesn't even tell you what the tears are all
about, but he just sheds a couple of tears or he gets a little scared as he is running the thing. It
is just line charge that you are getting; it is not from a specific incident.

You just start working with that, and he boils and he does all sorts of standard manifestations
and he comes out of it. You don't put him into what he was boiling from. You don't ask him
"What are you boiling off about? Where is this incident from?" You don't do any of that.

All you do is keep him over in analytical moments: "Are there other analytical moments in this
chain?"

Now, the reactive mind can get validated up to the point where the whole case starts to look
enturbulated and it does not start to rise up the tone scale. But, actually, you can start working
on the analytical side of the ledger and the case will come up the tone scale. Day by day by day
you can watch the difference.

You are not doing the spectacular, you are only doing the important. That is a nice
differentiation. It is terrifically spectacular to get a screamers screaming, but it is not good
processing.

If anybody is going to scream, they really have got no business running engrams. You will do
better, according to tentative conclusions so far, to keep them out of and beyond their aberrative
areas, and just try to pick up theta. Now, when I say aberrated areas, I mean simply chains of
aberration. For instance, if we take somebody and we know that he is pretty loopy on just one
subject, we stay away from that subject if he is low on the tone scale; we won't even pick up
analytical moments about it. In other words, we get him out and away from the obvious entheta
areas.