ABERRATION AND THE DYNAMICS

A lecture given on 25 June 1951

Review of Dynamic Straightwire

I want to go over with you the graph of all possible aberrations and all possible computations.

Some day when you have nothing better to do, just take this graph and look at it for a while and try to make up various situations that fit this thing. It is sort of a game, and you will find that you are giving yourself more Straightwire than you have ever had from any auditor. We start out with the dynamics, one through eight.

By the way, there are some magical numbers here. For instance, seven is a very magical number, divisible only by itself, and it has been used in mysticism and magic and metaphysics and psychiatry and everything. That has really been around for a long time, and it is usually the number assigned to mysticism and that sort of thing; there is a lot of symbology behind this. Then there is the number eight. That might be a bad designation to use because the primary symbol for eight when these numbers were brought into Greece was two moneybags, and that is actually the symbol for wealth and money. If we call it the eighth dynamic I don’t want you to think I am being sarcastic. I would not possibly be sarcastic. Now, this is all possible aberrations It works out.

We have all of these dynamics across the top. Now we take any one of those dynamics and put it in the space at the bottom, and then substitute in that position each dynamic in turn.

Each and every dynamic and each and every exterior manifestation of a dynamic may act as a suppressor on any other one of the dynamics.

In other words, the drive for the group can be suppressed by groups. The drive on groups can suppress also the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh dynamics.

For instance, let’s take a fellow on his first dynamic: He isn’t a friend of himself— his first dynamic is suppressing his first dynamic— so you could say that he is suppressing himself.

More importantly, we know that the first dynamic can be suppressed easily by the second dynamic. If you will pardon the risqué statement, "You’re no good in bed, so you’re no good." People have said, "If you are attractive physically then your marriage will run along fine." There are the first and second dynamics being hauled in together, and these say automatically, "Sexual impotency means individual incompetency."

As a matter of fact we have a whole philosophy— or whatever you call it— running through the society right now that says "The only thing wrong with a man is the fact that the second dynamic is the second dynamic is the second dynamic"— is a rose is a rose is a rose. Of course, you can’t work any aberration out of that, so they have a tough time.

The way you work this system is to just draw the interconnections between the A, R and C of each dynamic down to the ARC of the dynamic on the bottom.

Just as an aside, the other day somebody said, "ARC . . . arc welding— that’s what we’re doing: arc welding! "

Now, here is your intersuppression. A— affinity— only suppresses A. R— reality— only suppresses R. C— communication— only suppresses C. In other words, only likes suppress each other.

Let’s run this for the first dynamic. The A of the first dynamic gets enturbulated, let us say, on the A of the first dynamic: "You don’t like yourself! You’re your own worst enemy!" That is an A enturbulence between the first dynamic and itself. This can be enforced or inhibited: "You have to like yourself," "You don’t like yourself."

Next is reality: "I don’t know; I can’t make up my mind." That is "I" trying to agree with "I." Reality falls down between the person’s first dynamic and his first dynamic.

And then there is C, communication: How many people don’t have any sonic? Or how many people have you run into that could hear themselves talk when you took them back down the time track but couldn’t hear anybody else talk? That is an enforced first- dynamic communication line! It has not just been left alone; it has been enforced usually when it is that loopy.

Many people that you take back down the line never say a word of their own; they can’t pick up their own statements, but they can pick up everybody else’s statements on the track. There you have a break between the first- dynamic communication and the first- dynamic communication. This is also the fellow who can see everything in the picture but himself. There are actually cases like this. This is the first dynamic on the first dynamic. Now let’s take the interaction between the first and the second dynamics. The second dynamic affinity line for the first dynamic is rather obvious: a person is thought well of through the medium of the second dynamic by another person, his family, children and so on. Children like him and that is good. If children don’t like him or he is told children don’t like him, that starts the break- off.

And we just go up the line this way and draw these things. Work it out; it is a good mental exercise.

Now, this interaction of dynamics gives you all possible pleasure moments and all possible aberrations. You run it for the first dynamic, and then you run it for two, three, four, five, six and seven. And in this society you have to run it for eight, which is why the eighth dynamic is there.

The reason you have to run it for eight is that the person has been told that "God made this world," and "God made this world because God was good and wanted you to be happy," and so forth, and he thinks this is wonderful and he is running on this kind of computation, and then somebody comes along and says, "This isn’t God! " and that cuts down the fact that it can be a good world. You see how involved it can get. So you have to run the eighth dynamic in any society that has a Supreme Being.

And remember that eight has two sides. I found a terrific affinity between one person and the devil once. He had a terrific affinity. Another person was scared to death and what he was really scared of was the devil. We finally worked it out that it was the devil, and it wasn’t until we got off about sixteen locks on what the devil was going to do to him that he found out that his father was the devil. His father was the devil because in the second dynamic Mama had ordinarily said, "You ol’ devil, you!"

I am not asking you to digest this all at a glimpse, but you look that thing over and think about it a little bit and you will see that you can use this to find pleasure moments. "When was it fun to be by yourself?" "When was it fun to take a walk by yourself?" The guy will think around and all of a sudden he will remember a pleasure moment, a time when he wanted to be by himself and he was.

Of course, on the second dynamic you would think offhand that it is very obvious. You would think, "Second dynamic? Oh well, we’ll run the second and first, and that’s the end of that, so we’ll go on and skip the rest of it." You had better know something about this graph, because the amount of suppression on the second dynamic from the third is worse than what is on the first dynamic from the second. The suppression of the third dynamic on the second dynamic is enormous! And the suppression of the second dynamic on the third dynamic in America today is enormous. You start looking over just this angle in your preclear and if you look over just this computation, all of a sudden you are seeing a large number of possible combinations of aberration here which you might not ordinarily think of in handling your preclears. You can actually figure a preclear out and find out where his dynamics are maximally damped out. You find out, for instance, this person can contact the first dynamic wonderfully and just do swell on six, do fair on three, and then all of a sudden you find this person is ashamed of being a man or a human being! This person doesn’t believe in human beings. Here is dynamic four knocked galley- west! You say automatically, "Somebody has told him something about this." That is essentially true, but you will not get the situation unless you start examining four against all the rest of the dynamics. You start evaluating four as being suppressed by all the other dynamics in rotation, and each one of these by ARC, and the first thing you know, you will pick up combinations of aberration that you really hadn’t known existed.

There are some fantastic ones. Don’t tell your preclear there is such a thing as this, but just ask him, for instance, "Was there a time when you felt that human beings were going to take away what you owned?"

"Oh, them damn socialists!" You find out Papa was a banker, and then all of a sudden a whole bunch of material starts to come off the case. You wouldn’t have thought of that ordinarily.

So you can sit there and mechanically figure out how many ways this guy is aberrated. But you can also figure out all the ways that he can have had fun, and this is more important to the people you will be processing because you have to try to figure out more times where they had some fun in their lives than they will be able to recall! You are going to have to dig for a time when your preclear was able to sit down and draw a long breath and have a real pleasure moment.

You run him back to the time when he won the horse show; he was receiving a cup and there were eight thousand people present and they were all applauding and so forth, and you say, "We are really going to get him through this pleasure moment now"— and the preclear starts to run a terror charge! So you say, "I failed on that one. Let’s take him someplace else on the track."

There is quite a bit on pleasure in Science of Survival that some people have found awful. It had never struck them before that a 1.1 really gets his fun out of pulling the wings off a little bird. Somebody shot the little bird and it fell down; it was lying there suffering and gasping and so the 1.1 pulled its wings off, very slowly. That was a lot of fun!

I’m not kidding. You can really run pleasure moments at the band level where your preclear is. The person somewhere along the line has been knocked down from being a 1.5 to a 1.1; somewhere he has been knocked down from one stage to the next. That is great; you are going to be able to find early pleasure moments where this person got a big kick out of really getting mad, and if you can dig one of those things up you will blow some of the suppressors that knocked him from 1.6 down to 1.1. So there is more to it than meets the eye. In other words, here are all possible pleasure moments and all possible aberrations. I ask you to draw up, some time when you are sitting around with nothing else to do, a series of graphs on this and try to compare them one against the other. Compare it for your own life. I think if you did it thoroughly, you would wind up at 4.0.

This is the latest assist that we have on Straightwire and on Lock Scanning. This is not in the new book, so I am giving it to you now.

I assure you that you can probably find tens of thousands of locks on cases with this. You can certainly find hundreds of locks. An auditor shouldn’t have to sit there and use his imagination hour in and hour out, because half the time his preclear isn’t going to help him out any.

Earlier, there was Hurdy- Gurdy Straightwire, whereby you took inhibition and enforcement of ARC for each person who had been around the individual, on each dynamic. It gets a little more complicated with this, but you still have to know something about Hurdy- Gurdy. Hurdy- Gurdy lets you keep track of what you are doing.

Now, this system could be laid out in three strata, and this has to do, again, with the tone scale.

Domination by nullification is a method of handling human beings. I dare say that you have probably noticed this happening and you may even have had it pulled on you. The theory behind domination by nullification is a very simple one. The individual who pulls it considers himself so powerless that he has to make the individual with whom he is associating completely powerless in order to associate further. This is a very short- term method of committing suicide, because he starts pulling people down the tone scale, and as a person goes down the tone scale he becomes more and more dangerous.

An apathy case, for instance, is a very dangerous individual to have around, but not terribly active, so we don’t really worry about him.

I suppose one of the highest levels of overt dangerousness would be the grief case. You could keep pushing a person down to grief until he got down to the point where he was going to "kill you too" with tears. This would be the coward doing it with a kiss.

Domination by nullification is ARC inhibited. That is pretty low on the tone scale; it is down around 1. and down. The fellow says, "You can’t look at that, and you can’t do this and you can’t do that. And there is no reality and all is hopeless and there is no future. There is no MEST and there is no time track." And he says, "Oh, poor me," and "You know, I would love to do that but . . ." "I hate to have to tell you this, but people have been saying about you that . . ." This is the tone level of 1.1, 0.5, and so on.

Right above this is the enforced band: domination— outright, forthright domination by force. Here is where you get ARC enforced: "You’ve got to listen to me!" "You’ve got to look!" and other "intelligent" statements. That is enforced ARC. Above 2.0 is ARC neither inhibited nor enforced but merely pointed out or existing, which is pleasure moments. So you have these three levels.

Don’t look at Hurdy- Gurdy or this type of Straightwire as being something different, because it isn’t. Here is any Straightwire or any Lock Scanning, or any situation where affinity, reality and communication and what they group into— which is understanding— are inhibited or dominated. And you can use it to find ARC enhanced— other people, groups and so forth making pleasure available without forcing it on the individual.

That should also tell you something about how to give somebody a good time: you don’t force one on them.

This system should point out to you a lot of holes in cases that might be overlooked unless you were going at it systematically. You should, if you are working a preclear over a long period of time, definitely do one of these checks on him. Find out what dynamics are suppressing what dynamics and then start to take it apart. The first thing you know, some of the strangest computations will come out of this preclear’s life. You don’t have to think them up first, which is the beauty of it, because in order to think up all the strange computations that this fellow would have and all the inhibitions and all the enforcement’s and all of this and all of that, you would have to be that person, and it is bad practice to keep shifting valence and being the preclear. It is a strain on the auditor.