No matching fragments found in this document.
SUPPLEMENT NO. 2 to SCIENCE OF SURVIVAL September, 1951 From The Hubbard Dianetic Foundation, Inc. Wichita, Kansas Validation Processing L. Ron Hubbard Past history of Dianetics has found too many auditors too often addressing the entheta or frozen theta on a case. Processing which should have been directed solidly toward the invalidation of aberrative experiences many times primarily validated them. As a matter of course the auditor neglected the analytical moments during the processing because he felt they were not important, that they would continue to exist. True, but by validating engrams and secondaries constantly the preclear sometimes becomes so introverted on the subject of engrams that he tries to run himself; he thinks about this phrase and that phrase, this enturbulating experience and that enturbulating experience until he is thoroughly restimulated. This is especially true of the low-tone case. Attacking entheta with too much entheta simply enturbulates, and nothing positive happens. Theta has a peculiar characteristic of trying to attack enturbulated theta and disenturbulate it. The individual best survives when pleasurable experiences and prosurvival entities are brought into view. Hence tone rises, for preclears and cases move along more rapidly as theta moments are validated. Let’s suppose that for a while, without paying any attention to engrams and secondaries, the auditor addresses only the theta side of a lock chain. Can this make the preclear more reasonable and rational on a subject about which he is severely reactive? Could this validate his analytical mind? As we know, an engram accumulates locks and secondaries which form in chains in the reactive mind. Before the engram was received the organism was potentially analytical on the subject of the content of the engram, and remained so even then until the engram was keyed in. Finally, however, after the addition of lock after lock piled on top of the secondary, the engram gained a greater force on behavior than the organism could reason around. Reason then became relatively impossible on the subject. How can we go about restoring reason on the subject contained in the engram without removing these locks and without running the engram? Suppose the preclear has a certain chain of locks on the subject of women: one girl left without saying good-bye, another stabbed him in the back, and another ran off with his best friend, while another told him to his face that he didn’t amount to anything. These locks all charge up the chain of engrams at the bottom which say bluntly: “Women are no good.” Perhaps this preclear is very occluded, or the time available is simply not enough to enable running all the engrams on the subject, or the preclear is very low toned. How could he be made analytical on the subject of women? The key lies on the same lock chain. Validate the analytical side of the ledger and neglect the reactive side. Run the subject of women as a chain of analytical moments and keep away from the reactive material. “Do you remember anyone who gave you cookies?” “Oh, yes. There was an old lady in our block that gave me cookies.” (Aha, here is a woman who is some good!) “Do you remember a teacher that you liked?” “Yes, I remember a teacher who was pretty nice.” Copyright (©)1951 by L. Ron Hubbard. All Rights Reserved. “Do you remember a girl you went with who was lots of fun?” “Yes, there was one. I don’t remember her name now and I don’t know what she looked like, but I’m sure there was one.” Then go back over the same material again, picking up the old lady who lived down the block, the nice teacher and the times he had fun with the girl he liked, and contact these moments. As the preclear is calmly restrained from attacking the entheta, he may begin to experience a somatic. The more pleasure or analytical moments he hits, the worse the somatic may become. It is demanding attention. The somatic is actually at least one of the engrams on the track having to do with “Women are no good.” The auditor finds it difficult to resist the temptation of dropping down the track and running it. The auditor, too, is theta trying to attack entheta, but he must restrain himself. He must continue to run only the analytical moments on the subject, and suddenly the somatic will turn off again. There have not been a sufficient number of cases observed to date to see the permanency of the release, whether the somatic stays off permanently or merely goes out of restimulation. In the course of processing, however, the preclear becomes analytical on that chain, so there is some stability connected with this type of processing. Some preclears go through two or three locks all right with validation technique, but suddenly dive into a reactive incident. The analytical mind, when asked to be analytical about a subject, begins to discharge the reactive mind. Keeping the preclear out of entheta on the chain may be illustrated by the conversation which occurred while running one case on validation: “Oh, yes, I remember the nice old lady, and I remember my teacher. Gee, that first grade teacher—I certainly hated her . . . oh, she was terrible.” “Did you like your second grade teacher?” “Oh, she was all right. I didn’t have too bad a time.” “Did you ever go on a picnic with one of your teachers?” “Sure, we went to a picnic, and we had lots of fun; but do you know, that darned eighth grade teacher was there and she was such an old cross-eye ....” “Now, what did you have to eat at the picnic?” It isn’t easy to keep the preclear from dropping off into entheta; but what must be done is to validate the analytical mind. That thing which is validated grows stronger. Did you ever talk to a demon circuit while processing? If so, you know that after a short time the demon gets stronger. Sometimes a chronic aberration is turned off by rote. Suppose this chronic aberration or somatic is “wearing of glasses”: “How many lock chains are there connected with eyes?” “Five.” “Can you give me the names of these chains?” “Yes.” “Give me the name of the first chain.” The preclear gives the name of each chain in turn. The auditor then starts with the first chain named and asks the preclear to scan vocally the analytical moments on that chain, unless the preclear is too far down the scale. If he is unable to scan, use Straight Wire or Repetitive Straight Wire. (Repetitive Straight Wire is done simply by remembering incident after incident on a chain, one at a time, and then doing the same thing again and again in the same order.) After he has run the first chain as long as he can on the analytical side of the ledger until he drops off into entheta, the auditor asks for the second chain. Although the chains are usually given out in the sequence that they should be run, the auditor might ask, instead of for the second chain, for the next chain necessary to resolve the chronic somatic. Validation naturally makes vital use of present time also. The alert auditor will arrange plenty of present-time theta moments, particularly with the low-tone preclear; if not too many theta moments seem available in the past, these present-time moments can be reviewed. Environment for processing can be made pleasurable by perhaps a walk, coffee, sessions in the park. Also the auditor can draw out the preclear to feel he