ADDRESS OF AUDITOR TO PRECLEAR - SATURDAY EVENING COURSE

A lecture given on 1 July 1950

Confidence and Cooperation

I would like to cover the address of the auditor to the preclear

There is a matter of mood involved— a matter of affinity with the preclear— which must not be overlooked. One must not treat the task as a mechanical process. By treating it as such the preclear is not convinced that the auditor is interested in what he has to say. And if he doesn’t think the auditor is interested in his engrams, he isn’t going to give any engrams. It is a matter of sad comment on some cases that they are run by a disinterested auditor who gets the preclear into an incident and then decides, "Well, there’s not much there," and goes off to another incident, based upon the fact that he doesn’t really care whether the preclear gets rid of engrams or not.

One may not think that this is important because most auditors are very interested in the preclear on whom they are working. But when this is violated the somatic strip and the file clerk can decide suddenly that this auditor isn’t going to work with them and quit.

You will have many a preclear before you are through who has been stopped by the inefficiency of some auditor. So it becomes important, not because you are disinterested or you feel antagonistic toward the people on whom you are working, but because you are going to get patients who have been mishandled by somebody else.

There are two or three ways in which this can be done, all of them stem more or less from disinterest. One situation is that the auditor is not sufficiently interested in the preclear to raise his own necessity level above his own engram computations. If he is really interested in the preclear, his own engrams do not become directed at the preclear. He is not being intensely reactivated. His necessity level goes up, he wants this person to get well, he wants him to get rid of engrams; so we get a condition whereby the auditor is not himself restimulated He is too interested in his patient.

Now it happens occasionally that although he is interested, the preclear is running an engram which is so much like the auditor’s that the auditor does get restimulated, and he might even feel angry or upset by this. But if he really has the preclear’s interest at heart he is not going to make it difficult and stall the preclearb case, because once he does this he will practically finish that preclear as far as he as the auditor is concerned.

I have in the last few years contacted many people that I had been working on, whom I had turned over to somebody else with a little sketch of what they were supposed to do. I didn’t try to train anybody, I simply asked them to carry on with the case. And the person, not knowing what he was doing, would get restimulated at some point or would suddenly say, "Yeah! That’s the reason you fight with me all the time! You see, it was your mother saying it!" while the patient was in reveries About that time the somatic strip and the file clerk would say, "Whoa," and quit, and after that not only would the person get no analytical cooperation but no cooperation on anything.

So, we take such a case and start it into therapy again. One might think that- it would only be necessary to pick up the breach of the Code. But that is not entirely the case, because if this preclear has been too badly mauled, everything in the bank including the somatics may be in restimulation, and the somatic strip stops, the cooperation of basic personality4 stops, he doesn’t want anything more to do with it, and to try to enter this case now becomes very difficult. Start in after engrams and the person will say, "No, I don’t contact anything," and so on. You may even get this on someone who is close to normal.

One of the best ways to kick it out is on a direct memory circuit. Get the person to tell you all about the breach of the Code while he is wide awake. Don’t make him go through any of the routine. Just get him talking about it casually, and finally discuss it out. By just remembering it some of the charge can be taken off it, and by asking him and being solicitous about it we begin to establish a new affinity.

It may take you some time. Don’t be surprised, if a case has been badly mauled in therapy, to have to spend 20 hours getting the case to the state it was in before some would- be auditor messed it up. The person’s sense of reality may be upset. It might have been a reactive minds partners who did it. Engrams which had not heretofore been restimulated and were not yet ready to reducer might have been picked up. It makes a nasty situation.

One possible way for this to happen is by the auditor becoming angry at the preclear because the preclear is not getting the engram which he thinks the preclear ought to get; or by the auditor challenging the preclear. saying, "You’re resisting me," or making statements to the effect that the preclear has used any of this material in his present time life.

But the worst one is knocking apart the preclear’s concept of reality. That is deadly. "You know that didn’t happen to you and you know all this is just dub- in," 8 or, "This doesn’t fit in there; you know that when we were having dinner at the Gloopspotters, Binny Barnes sat on the right, not the left."

The auditor must audit in the recognition that his own recall might be entirely incorrect. After all, he does have the person back on the tracks in the incident.

Those are the ways one can stall down a case and fix it up so that the somatic strip won’t cooperate and the file clerk won’t give you any further information.

It is as though one has invited confidence by starting Dianetic therapy, and then by having broken the confidence has established a condition wherein no further cooperation is going to be offered. But it will work out. You will have to undo cases like that so you had better recognize how to locate and troubleshoot such things.

One of the ways you can recognize this symptom is just by asking the auditor what happened, how long this person was in therapy, what they contacted, what they did. They are liable to tell you all sorts of things that did happen, which is a catharsis in itself, just telling you about things that were bad.

For instance, a husband and wife have been auditing each other and he has audited her for 60 hours. He has not contacted any engrams and has become rather angry at her, and finally told her he doesn’t think Dianetics works. He says, "Oh well, you wanted me to do this for you and I just did it for your sake, but actually I think the reason you act this way toward me is just because you’re mean and nasty anyway, so to hell with you."

Now take this case that has been run hour in and hour out. Certainly that case contacted something; it must have. It’s impossible not to. But the case has just been thoroughly shaken up. You will hear comments like, "Oh, yes, I contacted an engram but I didn’t get any convulsion out of the patient, she didn’t curl up in a ball or anything. I heard from Bill the other night, and he told me that every time he would contact one of these engrams in Ezra, why, Ezra would roll up in a ball! My wife didn’t do that so of course it couldn’t have been an engram. I even took her back to birth and it didn’t affect her any. I took her all the way through it one whole time but she didn’t get any effect out of it at all. She just got a little headache. And the next day she got a cold and so I couldn’t work on her for a while."

You are going to hear some strange things when you start putting together cases, including somebody destroying somebody else’s sense of reality, or knocking somebody off as far as Dianetics is concerned. Let’s say we have a patient who was under some sort of treatment for 10 years for an asthmatic condition. Then somebody finally says it is all in the mind and there is a big rnw between husband and wife and he says, "I’m going to take you to see a psychiatrist."

To which she replies, "No, you’re not."

So he says, "Yes, I am, because you’re crazy."

Then there is a lot of talk in the family about the fact that it is all in her head. This sort of thing goes on, "It’s all in your head, it’s all in your imagination." For years this person may have gotten the statement "Well, that isn’t a real illness, it’s all in your head. I mean it’s just in your imagination. There is nothing to it, it’s not real." Meanwhile the person’s sinuses are running and he feels terrible.

A person is not very stable in his sense of reality. Now he starts contacting an engram and the engram is the one that contains the asthma or the sinusitus. But it isn’t real, it’s all in his head because it has been salted, every time he gets a bad attack, by somebody arguing him out of it on the basis of, "Now you know all this is just imaginary. If you had sufficient strength of character you could snap out of it. You know that you could. You’re just imagining things are happening to you. The thing for you to do is just to snap out of this depressed condition which you’re in and your sinuses will clear up."

The auditor can have a hard time with this sometimes, because he gets the case started and sends the preclear back into the same dramatization, over and over. It may have been that very dramatization which kept it going, the fact that somebody was always telling this patient that it was imaginary and delusion and so on, and the auditor i8 going to have to patch up such things.

The antidote for this piece of poison is to give the best possible sense of reality back to the patient on a straight memory circuit.

The straight memory circuit is the standard bankl circuit of staying in present time and remembering. It is a validating circuit. What a person can remember he seldom questions.

For instance, I remember that I was eating dinner a few minutes ago and if anybody comes up to me and says, "No, you weren’t eating dinner a few minutes ago," I would say, "You’re crazy, I was!" Therefore, just challenging that, actually, in even a fairly balanced mind rather serves to strengthen up the sense of reality. It makes a combative "It is true."

Now we start working the case and ask the patient, "What school did you go to?"

"I went to school in such- and- such, I guess."

"Well, where did you go to kindergarten?"

"Oh, a funny looking place, don’t quite remember, think the name of it was Mann’s, Mann’s Kindergarten. I don’t know."

"Now come on, you can remember what it was. What did your teacher look like? When did you get sent home for wetting your pants?"

"Oh, that. Yeah, I got sent home the first grade too." Right away we have gotten the scene opened up. That is a validating circuit. And all of a sudden the patient is in contact with reality back to 5 years of age.

Somebody will say sometimes, "Oh, all of my grandparents are occluded. I can’t remember people anyway. I just don’t remember people. I have a bad memory."

I merely reply to him, "Well, you remember me, don’t you?"

And the person says, "That’s silly."

"Well, I’m a person. You remember me, don’t you?"

"Well, yes, yes."

"All right. Now let’s remember your wife. You have a wife?"

"Yes. Sure I remember my wife, that’s silly."

"Well, now there’s two people you’re remembering. Now let’s remember your boss."

"What are you trying to do to me? Of course I remember my boss."

"Let’s remember all the people in the office."

"Well, sure, sure." The person is going out wider and wider.

Suddenly he is remembering the next- door neighbors and old teachers, and the girl that used to babysit with him. He’s remembering back along the line. One could then ask something like, "What did you say about not being able to remember people?"

"Well, I don’t remember people very well. I don’t remember their names."

"Do you know my name?"

"Yes."

"Well, now you’ve remembered my name." So, the theory works on an expanding basis. The standard bank circuits validate the recall.

You may have run a patient who says, "Yes, I just contacted that feeling in my throat and these words did come to me, but I don’t believe it’s real, I’m all out of touch with it."

And you say, "Well, when did it happen?"

"I don’t know." "Come on, you can tell me when it happened. When did you have the last sore throat?"

"Oh well, that was last month."

Get something very close in to the person’s knowledge, something that the person couldn’t possibly not know.

Of course this doesn’t apply in the field of severe or chronic psychosis. You can’t ask a psychotic to remember anything and validate it very well (although you occasionally will be surprised at how much a psychotic does locate in his immediate vicinity). But with the normal patient we are trying to validate what he knows.

He has to face, in order to be completely sane, the reality of now. But now is interpreted in the reality of then. So, his awareness of now has to be to some degree validated and interpreted through his awareness of then. It isn’t good enough just to face reality here, you have got to face reality yesterday and the day before and when you were 5 years of age too. Unless all of those things are equally real, now is not quite as real.

If yesterday isn’t real, today isn’t going to be so real, and tomorrow will be hard to compute in terms of reality, so one gets deluded concepts of tomorrow.

If one didn’t have an imagination and if one didn’t have computative or predictive ability, he would never know what was going to happen to him in the next five minutes. And it is surprising how many people in the world it isn’t very real to.

There are good computational reasons why a person can’t remember. But do not underestimate the power of the analytical mind. It is a pretty strong mechanism. If the mechanisms of the analytical mind were not there, there would be nothing for these reactive records to impinge upon and throw out of line. In other words, if a man has a manic that he is going to build a great bridge, it’s because his analytical mind can build a great bridge. But the reactive bank can run up against it and hold it so that he has now got to build a great bridge. And the sad part of it is that sometimes he can’t do so. There’s no ability to throw out of line. This is where a person’s profession goes out of gear. So don’t underestimate the analytical mind. It is good and it is strong.

We can go back down the standard memory circuits in the analytical mind. You as an auditor can persuade people to do this on the basis of opening up spheres a little wider and a little wider with questions like, "You remember me, don’t you?" and all of a sudden, as the circuits and occluded areas open up, as the channels get wider, more and more will spring into view in the person’s past life.

It is a highly important order of business when you have a person who has been invalidated, let us say, by the wife, who has been mixed up in auditing by a bad auditor, who has had a pretty bad life in general, not to simply take the person back into therapy and slug at it. You start in on a standard memory circuit. You get the person to remembering this and remembering that, because standard memory is strong enough to kick out locks.

I had to investigate this very thoroughly a few years ago because it was necessary to discover why certain types of mental healing were capable of producing a catharsis. If we knew the answers to these things then it should be theoretically fairly simple with Dianetics to set up a straight memory type therapy. And if we could do that with what we knew in Dianetics, if what we knew was effective, then that straight memory type therapy would be much more effective than it had been in the past. I set it up that way and found out that it followed certain definite actions and equations.

A person believes about himself what he has been told about himself, and if he has an aberrated belief about himself it’s what he has been told about himself, so you want to find out who held this kind of an opinion in his life. Trace it down and get him to remembering straight through on the subject of whether it was his father, his mother or his grandfather who was like this, or who might have criticized somebody this way, who would have had this kind of an opinion toward a child, or toward another human being. The person starts thinking it over and suddenly says, "Heh- heh, my grandfather." You get a little false four’ off, and he says, "That’s funny, I feel better." That is about all there is to it.

Sometimes you can even turn off such things as Parkinson’s disease this way. Just ask the person to go back and remember when the attacks started.

"Oh, yes, it’s because it’s so- and- so, and I had such business worries."

"Well, who was worrying you at that time?"

"Oh, I don’t know."

"Oh, yes, you can remember, you can remember who was worrying you."

"Well, my partner was in pretty bad shape. I didn’t trust him."

"Did your father ever have any partners?" And by going back on one particular line you finally achieve this association of people, and by making the analytical mind face that association, all of a sudden it becomes a differentiation.

Insanity is total identification of fact with fact with fact. Everything is the same, everything is very closely associated. Now, as we go up the line into better lines of thinking we finally get to differentiative- type thinking. The higher spheres of the analytical mind differentiate very clearly. They do not make the mistake of thinking that because Joyce’s voice is like Emma’s, that Joyce is Emma. They will also differentiate very rapidly. Joyce’s voice is not Emma’s voice, although reactively they have had this computation right along and therefore they didn’t like Joyce.

By suddenly clipping the mind in, in 20 to 30 percent of the cases you will get a sudden reaction, and it will false- four. You ask the person, "Now, you can remember this. Whose voice was like Joyce’s? You know somebody whose voice was like Joyce’s, who was it? Now stay right here in present time and tell me. You can remember. Was she a blonde girl?"

"Oh no, no. She was a brunette." And he has told you a fact right there.

"Well now, you can remember this fat girl."

"She was a slim girl. What are you talking about?"

"Okay. What was her name?"

Sometimes the person will try to dodge the whole issue by getting flash answers, but this flash answer mechanism is going straight down to the standard banks anyhow. We want that flash answer mechanism up front connected with "I" as much as we can get it, so we bring it up there. And the person says, "Heh- heh, that’s silly. How could I have ever thought that that was fact?"

"Well, how do you feel?"

"I feel fine. Yup."

This 15- minute technique can be used on people you don’t want to start into therapy. Just tell them to sit down in the chair and ask, "Now what’s worrying you these days?"

"Well, lifeb been worrying me these days because I don’t like my wife."

"Oh, yah? Is that a fact? Now what did your wife do that you don’t like?"

"Oh, just about everything. She’s terrible. She’s extremely bossy."

"What did she tell you to do?"

"Well, it’s about my clothes mostly."

"Who used to raise hell about your clothes?"

"Oh, my mother."

"What’s similar about your wife and your mother?"

And 20 or 30 percent of the time the person may suddenly say, "I don’t know.... Oh, wow! She sure did give me a lot of lickings about getting my clothes dirty! You know, that’s a funny thing!"

"Okay. How do you feel about your wife now?"

"Oh, she’s not bad."