Lecture: SOP 5 Long Form Step V – Additional Techniques
Author: Hubbard, L. R.
Document date: 1953, 23 January
Document title: SOP 5 Long Form Step V - Additional Techniques
Document type: lecture transcript
Event: Philadelphia Doctorate Course Supplementary Lectures
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Document ID: 5301C23A
Description: Hubbard talks about MEST as chaos and why there is no reason in the MEST universe; tells his audience they stole their bodies; talks about manipulating energy from the perspective of an engineer.
And there’s one datum you’re not working with, is . . I don’t care what people think of me.
Now you . . you can’t be very well and still care, by the way.
Where you have, then, an incident outlined you’ll find out in your experience that it’s there, and it’s that way, and it’ll run that way. That’s all. As tough as it is perhaps to accept a whole
track, you show me any Four or Five and I can show you an assumption, electronic implants and so forth not just on an E-meter; I can throw this preclear into convulsions on the subject.We had such an incident in Philadelphia. I started running an assumption, for the whole class.
We had one fellow whose case had been bogged down for a couple of years. He hadn’t had any good auditing, and he started to laugh and he went into hysterics. An assumption1, grabbing a baby at birth, blew into view and there he was. Out In the clear with sonic and visio. That’s interesting, isn’t it?
You see, every one of you are guilty of stealing a body. You don’t own that body.
The only lie there is on the track really uh . . the only real truth, you might say, there is on the track, is that there is no true datum. Th . . that that’s . . that’s the truth, that’s a good high
level truth.Such concepts as codes of Justice and so forth are made up on basis of workability, and they’re born out of a pretense. And therefore, because they are born out of a pretense and then
became factual you’ll find people, whenever they have assumed an untrue datum, are getting very serious about the truth of something. And the harder they insist that something is true, the surer you can be that it’s not. They might not know that it’s not true, but basically if you followed the reasoning all the way down, you would find it fallacious.Man is continually representing to you that he owns a body, and he doesn’t. He steals one.
And Freud was looking for guilt. Do you want to find some guilt?
Let’s look that one in the eye for a moment. The very thing he owns with he stole and he knows he stole. And somebody comes along and grabs . . and grabs him and throws him into the clink or something for having run off with a couple of teaspoons from the local manor or something, and he goes into a complete fit. Why does he go into a fit? He thinks he’s going to be tried for his basic crime in this life which is the theft of one Homo Sapiens, which is kidnapping.
The FBI uh . . that’s Federal uh . . Bureau of Infamy uh . . in the United States . . uh . . the FBI has made it an electrocutionable offense to kidnap anybody. You would have found with the publication of that new law, a dive had you been able to measure it, or had you measured it – on the mental health of the U.S. You would have find . . found these two things doing a simultaneous action. The mental health and security of Individuals in the U.S. doing a dive, and the publication of a law making it a capital offense to kidnap a child. Why? Everybody kidnapped a child. We know they kidnapped a child, that’s why they stood around and said “Isn’t it terrible! He ought to be killed! He kidnapped a child!” and “Oh, that’s awful!” Because you see, he fellow who yells loudest in the crowd is . . is . . is, of course, asserting the fact that he, above all, is not guilty of this because he is being very reprimanding on the subject. So watch that fellow who yells loudest in the crowd on such a thing as kidnapping, such a thing as hanging, so forth. You could take him off quietly and you would process him because you’d find that incident right there on whatever he’s protesting against wis . . with a
screaming fat. This tells you that some time on the track I must have been a psychiatrist, doesn’t it? Well, that’s right. I was.All right. Uh . . therefore evaluation of data and conditions and situations in the MEST universe would seem to be frail somehow. The evaluation of data, the evaluation of Justice and injustice, good and bad, right and wrong would seem to be subject to a certain frailty of logic – and it is.
People have remarked that there is no sexual custom anywhere in the world that has not been praised someplace in the world as the thing to be or do. There is nothing immoral in the world which is not thoroughly moral someplace else in the world.
There is nothing moral that is not somewhere immoral. What are we dealing with then? We’re dealing with flows.
Now as you go across this subject you will find that these reverse actions are always coming in and upsetting the situation, because it’s unpredictable. Sometimes they are not reverse and sometimes they are reverse, and this becomes very confusing to people. Well, the biggest confusion there is is, “There is reason.” That s a big confusion. “Th . . th . . there is reason.”
Everybody gets convinced there is such a thing as reason. Why? If the MEST universe is chaos. It is essentially confusion. And the fellow’s protesting all the time about the fact there’s confusion, there’s confusion, there’s confusion, and let there be reason, there must be reason. He’s of course holding out for something that doesn’t exist in this universe on the level that most people exist on. You seed So that’s one of the first lies, that in this universe there is reason. And you are going to worry yourself into an early demise if you think your preclear has a reasonable case, or that reason can finish off his case.
We have in the “Q’s” and the Logics the basis of reason above the level of flows. The second you go into the level of flows you get into the area of unpredictable reverses and immediately chaos ensues. Energy goes backwards, or when you want it to go backwards it goes forwards, and people use this and that’s called engineering. You use the impulse of energy to do one thing to make it do something else by letting it do that one thing; and that is . . that’s engineering.
You, you uh . . take this river and this river wants to run on down the stream and you want to dam it up. So you take the strength that it’s using to run on down the stream to dam it up. You use what it’s trying to do to make it do what you want it to do. And that trickery and prestidigitation with the slip stick and the bulldozer is called engineering. You find out that this energy does not want to be trapped, so you make it trapped in order to untrap itself suddenly. That is a condenser. Anything you find out that something doesn’t want to do, you can then make it do it, too. That’s the study.
An engineer can nail this down because he’s dealing with pure energy forms. He’s dealing with pure chaos. And he can pilot his way through a reasoning level on pure chaos and it looks very reasonable to him. That’s because he knows it’s chaos and so he can make the chaos predictable and make it behave. He’s going on a bunch of agreements, you set He’s going down the level of a whole lot of agreements about this stuff, and all he had to find out was what was the principal thing agreed upon.
It gets interesting; you use the strength of the river to dam the river. You can get very classy about this, by the way, and you can use the strength of one river to dam up another river. You can use life to bring about death, any time. Take secret police work. They always take the liveliest looking girls they can get ahold of in order to bring about the early, quick demise
of political enemies. Uh . . nice, big, beautiful reverses. You gonna look for reason in this?No, don’t, don’t bother.
Reason ceases to exist the moment that flows begin. And here you have a creature who is subsisting on energy, and you look for this character to be reasonable, and you protest that he’s not reasonable. Why protest? Just assume he isn’t reasonable and then go ahead and . . and bail him out of energy and he will become reasonable.
That . . that’s a very short statement, but what’s . . what chaos is is energy. Energy is chaos, and that chaos very early falls Into strange and unpredictable patterns. And so you can take an overall pattern and control it somehow. You can even make the chaos work for you. An engineer does that.
The chaos of [a ads][transcript error?] maintains an even pressure on a gas bag. That’s interesting, isn’t it? I mean, the gas is going in all directions and it’s hitting particles of gas that are hitting particles of gas, and it’s Just traveling in all directions; and so he looks at this and he says, “How can we . . how can we make some sense out of this chaos?” And the only way he can make any sense out of it the fact that it will exert a pressure interior in a container . . and he uses it that way. He gets, then, an equilibrium of forces simply by insisting that all the chaos be uniform.
And in such slippy little ways he slides in and does things with energy.
Well, you’re not gonna do things like that with your preclear. He’s an energy unit, only you’re trying to bail him out of being an energy unit, you see, because he’s not really an energy unit. And as long as he continues to be an energy unit he will continue to be unstable, chaotic and upset.
You can handle energy in the MEST universe with engineering principles, but don’t try to keep your preclear in the area of energy if you expect him to get well. Bring him out into the area of postulates.
Hubbard, L. R. (1953, 23 January). SOP 5 Long Form Step V – Additional Techniques. Philadelphia Doctorate Course Supplementary Lectures, (5301C23A). Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Notes
- Definition: assumption ↩