SECOND SESSION
 January 26, 1952


NORM: How do you feel?

I feel very good, excellent. As I told Pat, it was going to take me approximately a week to go through the postulates, only, of my entire lifetime. I haven't quite completed that. I'd say ten to fifteen percent of these things still remain as effective forces in my particular existence at this time. These postulates occur both on a conscious level and a non-vocal, ‘sub-conscious’ level. Those that occur on a conscious level usually are the result of a non-vocal level— as such, they have no force when it comes to being. Those that occur on the non-vocal level are the most important ones. It's amazing what I found out about myself— just amazing.

I thought last Sunday I knew myself pretty well, but I didn't. That was only the beginning. I'm still like a young child with his new training pants on— haven't learned how to use them. It's a lot of fun. Pretty soon, I'll put on long trousers.... That'll take about six months, I think, altogether.

BETTY: What do you base your judgment of time on?

My activities, my goals, my efforts toward them, and the gradual unfolding of my own life history will take that long. Now, my reality agrees with yours in that six months has a calendar date, has a chronological date, has a harmonic date, has a node date, has an agreement date. I have agreed that it will take that long, and such it will. And all of my efforts have been toward making that come true.

And it will be true. You can rely on it.

NORM: Could you have agreed upon a shorter time?

I could have— but the estimate was made in a flash and as such I still think it's a good estimate. Now new data on myself has come up in amazing amounts. I can modify it if I desire— well, if— again, if I desire to do so. But I won't. The conclusion is quite valid, and I'll stick to it, not in spite of hell and high water, of course. New data, emergency data, high priority data will change it. But at the moment, nothing needs changing. It still remains.

One of the things I found out for myself— in my particular order of existence, where there is an extreme injury, physically, to me, it has been necessary to run out the injury on the cellular level. Not necessarily on the mental level. Once I run out the injury on the cellular level, my control over that group of cells, or that organ, or the effects of that organ, becomes as complete as I can wish it. This is a little bit contradictory to the original concept that I had.

My original concept was that, if I so determined, it would not affect me, but where there was a severe injury it is necessary to run it out. This may be due still to lack of complete self-determinism in myself.

BETTY: What exactly do you mean when you say "run it out?"

I re-experience it. Not without pain, sometimes with pain. Depends on how I feel about it. Now I discovered that I had my nose broken twice. This was news to me. I didn't know it. I was skating along on a street, a hill, about three hundred yards long, about ten to fifteen degrees from level. Came down the street on skates, turned my head and there was a mailbox, just as I turned my head, kerplop! Blood, all those sorts of effects. Nose was broken, up near the joint, here. A little spur of bone, at least, remained in that position, partially bone, partially cartilage. No physician was in attendance. Grandmother said, "It's fine— nothing too much wrong. Stop your crying." Swept up the blood. My nose hurt for a couple of days. And that was it. Nevertheless, this bone remains. Now, the point is this: can I remove the bone? I don't think I can. It is too severe an injury. The easiest way if to have it removed for me by a very simple operation. I can re-experience that with full perceptics— pain, or no pain, according to what I desire. I can even bring on the blood again if I desire to do so. I can literally burst the veins going to that particular joint. But that does not cure the original injury. That bone is still there.

Take a cell. There is in our particular gravity field a layer of precipitated salts. Are you interested in this? If you are, I'll continue. [...pause...] I have to explain to a certain extent what gravity is. For me, at the moment, gravity is a spinning field, which has certain peculiar characteristics. It is perpendicular to an effect in the earth. It is going through us in a laminar fashion, this way. [gestures] Slices through our bodies— actually going through us. We in turn resist this field, perpendicular to it. The field may speed up or slow down, depending on the rotation of the earth. As it does, these salts are sensitive to this unique deceleration or acceleration in the field. They tend to precipitate out in layers in the cells, perpendicular to this field— this way— [gestures]. The communication from layer to layer, through layer to layer, in each cell, slowly but surely goes down, if this gravitational field shifts continuously or non-continuously.

BETTY: May I ask what you mean by "communication between layers"?

The protoplasm flow. The molecular duplication takes place in a cell. There's an actual electric current, speaking very broadly, that occurs in each cell, on a very minute basis, on a molecular basis. Bulkley, in his little book here, approaches this idea very nicely. He misses it to a certain extent. The mechanism of molecular duplication is somewhat similar as he sets it up. But not quite.

Consider a solenoid. If you put a current into a solenoid it produces a particular type of field. Molecules can line up to produce solenoid types. These solenoid types can be excited by salts in solution about the solenoid types. In doing so they set up a so-called electromagnetic field that flows around the configuration of the molecules. If there are enough particles which can be duplicated by this field, a molecular duplication takes place in a series of time steps. This means true molecular duplication. This means that the protoplasm in the cell can duplicate itself, on a mechanical basis, if there are sufficient salts, proteins, and what-not present in the cell to do so.

BETTY: Well, then, you can get complete healing?

Yes— if the salts are available freely. If they are not available freely, but are in layers, if they tend to laminate, communication with these layers, with the molecular range, becomes so poor that the cell begins to age and is unable to reproduce itself, in a true sense— to heal itself, in a true sense. Now the thing to do is to break up these layers, or to prohibit their forming, by running out the old injury. If there is enough motion in the cell, these layers tend to break up. They are deconditioned, as some call it. There's an actual molecular deconditioning in that these layers are broken up. Thus communication in the cell takes place again, on a very high level. One current being duplicated at the end of the cell is again duplicated at the other end of the cell. And thus you have healing.

Now take my bone, again, in my nose. In this case there is an extreme deposition, in laminar layers of salts, that I can no longer move or communicate with. Thus, as far as I'm concerned, that is, in present time, that's a dead piece of matter contained in my body. I can't affect it too much. To a certain extent it affects me. Now I can remove it surgically. I can attempt within a period of time to remove it myself. The easier thing to do is to remove it surgically.

Again, getting back to physical injury. I was struck in the kidney one time by a doctor in the Navy. As a result I had a beautiful kidney stone. That was the site of the injury. The cause, of course, was the striking. Barring out the striking, I will never again in that particular kidney have difficulty, nor will I have in the other kidney. That was a very easy thing to run out. It might not even have been necessary to run it out. But in perfect health, I did so. I concluded that for perfect health, in the future, it is necessary as such to run out all injuries in my body, insofar as I desire. Now, with complete communication of my body— I said of my body— with complete communication, I can predict where low health will occur and run out any old injuries necessary to produce high health.

Is that fairly clear? If it isn't, say so. Let's have nice, open communication.

MIKE: Would a person, then, in a field of very little gravity, live longer?

I was rather startled to find out that Mr. Richard S. Shaver had this concept. For me this was new. The concept came to me not too long ago, about five days.

NORM: Could a person cause himself to respond differently to this gravitational field, and thereby alter its effects?

In order to live, one must exist in an electromagnetic field. Insofar as I know at the present time, without an electromagnetic field present, it is not possible to exist as we know it.

NORM: Could one vary the strength of that field, or its effect?

One does, by setting up points of polarity and then aligning these points of polarity in the body. This is done continuously, incidentally, on a very low level. One does vary the effects of this field. That is one of the ways in which one controls one's heart beat. Also, the specific gravity, the viscosity of the blood stream, and the pH. The basic biochemistry of the body is one of the most fascinating things I am now learning.

The motility of the protoplasm within the medium of time is extremely important in a cell. The nucleus of the cell itself is usually not affected by the layers of salt precipitated about it. Now these layers of salt are only four or five angstroms thick, which, if you know your physics or basic mechanics, is an extremely thin thing. But they can affect the protoplasm, they can affect the amino acids and peptides which make up the protoplasm.

As you run out an injury, contacting emotion and action, the currents are actually regenerated from the nerve fibers, partially out of the brain, partially out of the salts. With a directed desire on the part of an individual, there is enough residual current (quoting now, using a very common word, "current") from the nerve fiber, fibril, to produce this effect against the layers of the deposited salts. And thus you begin to break them up and you can rehabilitate the particular cell or cells affected, or the organ affected. The more communication you have with the organ or cells that were affected originally, the more completely you can run out the old injury.

Now, again, in my particular state it is not always necessary to run out the injury unless I desire to do so. The effect on me as a self-determined individual varies with the destruction and alteration and precipitation of salts in the cells or organ affected. If I determine a goal for my body and the old injury affects that goal or can affect that goal, I run out the old injury.

BETTY: Otherwise you just overcome it, by total concentration?

No, I overcome it by ignoring it. It is not affecting my goal. I ignore it. When it begins to affect my goal, I do something about it.

BETTY: If you overcome it, you're using extra energy to overcome it, so in ignoring it you have that much more energy for reaching your goal?

It needs much less energy for ignoring it. When I have finished running out the injury, yes. Because then my communication becomes maximum, or an optimum for that particular moment. And thus I have more available energy within my body at all points of my body and mind to effect toward my goal.

NORM: What effect does the auditor have upon the internal fields of the other person? Can he have any?

How many of you accept the idea of theta? Whatever your reality is, if you don't accept it, I can't talk to you at the moment. If you do, for purposes of discussion, the auditor has a certain field of theta about him. Whatever theta is for you (I'll not attempt to explain to you what it is for me), for the auditor's theta to assist the individual is perfectly possible. And there are methods of communication in which this is done. If the counter-emotion of the auditor is such that the other person's desire is to assist in therapy (via his own standpoint), there is enough extra energy allotted to the individual to enable him to assist himself.

NORM: Is that an energy drain from the auditor?

The energy drain in that sense implies a couplet. There is no true couplet, from theta. There is a cause and an effect. To be very loose, the auditor becomes a cause, his subject is an effect, and in turn the deconditioning is itself a cause. Now the method by which "theta" accomplishes this can be known by anyone who chooses to investigate, by your own reality. And it is with your own reality that we shall agree. And no other. Not with mine. Because mine is my own. As is yours.

Next question, please?

MIKE: When you think with your body, for you, how is this different from what you did before?

I— my body— my mind— are all equal to one.

Imagine yourself as a child again, if you can do this conveniently without leaving present time. You look at a machine, or a box, or a hammer, or a screwdriver, or a toy. You perceive the purpose, the goal, the effect, the cause, the action, the method behind these things. You do it instantaneously. You're as one with the object. In this case, I am as one with myself. And even the use of the word, ‘myself,’ is superfluous. I am one— I am me— I exist. Of this I am certain. There is no doubt. I have no doubt at all that I have a heart, lungs, the stomach, the muscles, the skull, the brain and eyes. They're all there. This is me, and I had never thought it impossible to achieve this. I was certain it was possible. I had never doubted it. I most certainly don't doubt it now. No person should. If the person agrees to doubt it — what are the causes, the reasons— why do they want to agree, who do they want to help, where do they fail, why excuse themselves, where's the regret and blame? You can go up the list— it's all available. It works.

NORM: Can you define your state?

Only by analogy.... Geometrically, it is up. In time, it's forward. In goal, it's perfection, accomplishment. In method, what is the structure? Where is the reality? All these things are questions you will have to answer within yourself.

NORM: Can you give us any information about how you feel about groups— and your relation to them?

Very good. This group has a certain goal, a collective goal, an individual goal. Some of these goals, at the moment, are opposing. Thus you have counter-effort, counter-thought, counter-emotion. Slight dissonance, disunity. My efforts in the goal are minimal.

By and large, when the tone level is raised of the group as a cause, the goal becomes manifest and all strive toward it. I personally, and I use the word very succinctly, agree with the goal. [...pause...] My affinity with the goal is maximum.

NORM: Another question. In any statements you make about the techniques we have been working with, do you feel that you may still have postulates within you concerning these techniques that may be influencing your self-determinism at this time?

 The first thing I did, in my Sunday evening "rebirth," Monday morning, and then through Monday afternoon, was to re-examine all my postulates concerning this matter. As a word, as a method, as an epistemology— whatever you want to call it— as a communication system, as a cause, as an effect, in all its varieties. I ran them all out. That is to say, I recognized them. They are integrated with my present data. They are constantly being reintegrated. I discovered certain things for myself, about these techniques, which I didn't know before.

 NORM: Have you examined postulates concerning healing?

Oh, yes. All of them. That was the second thing I did.

NORM: Do you feel as I do on this? Each person will probably have a slightly different way of getting to this state of being.

Yes. Each person is a different case— not just from logic, but from certainty. Every person has a different reality. Every person has a different goal. And every person has a different structure. As such they cannot all be the same. At the present time, these methods are nearly ubiquitous for all people. They can be made more so. For the moron, no— for the imbecile, no. For the 78 to 100 [IQ] group, yes. From there on up, most certainly. As a sideline, those people who are morons and imbeciles normally brought themselves to that state. And as such they are almost impregnable.

NORM: That brings up a topic— I wonder what your feelings are. What is our responsibility, for instance, to a psychotic who has apparently chosen to be that way?

That is rather a broad question. I can turn it back to you and ask you, "What is your goal toward psychotics?" In a world of high-toned people, can a psychotic exist?

NORM: I don't feel that a person would choose to be psychotic in a world of high-toned people.

There is probably a resonance point in a world of high-toned people where psychotics and neurotics, as we call them now, can no longer exist. It would be literally impossible. At present, of course, it is not. Where this resonance point is, I don't know. I have computed it— but it is only a computation based upon data, which is structurally unsound. I recognize this. Therefore I say I don't know.

Now my responsibility toward a psychotic, or anybody that I recognize as a psychotic, is nil, until that psychotic opens his mouth and says, "Come help me." Until that time I have no ethical right to disturb his particular aberration. Unless he says "Help me."

NORM: Under the condition where that psychotic may be interfering with other human beings' self-determinism— what do you feel is your responsibility?

What is the basic premise of self-determinism?

NORM: It is interfered with only by your own choice.

Man is still self-determined. The whole theory of self-determinism can be summed up in a very simple sentence. Three words: it is you. Nothing more need be said. If this isn't true, and you all know that it is, the world doesn't exist. We don't exist, nothing exists– and of course we do.

JOE: Speaking of psychotics, compatibility and incompatibility, did I infer that you had extrapolated a time area where incompatibility [sic] with high-toned persons would no longer be possible? All I want, personally, is a yes or no answer.

Yes. I can give a very loose answer, and say "yes." Just take it as very loose. You had more questions, I thought.

MIKE: I do. What was point one in the chain of aberration with you in this life?

My decision to be human.

MIKE: At what time did that occur? You mean, your earliest decision to be human?

There is a point in existence, in MEST, where one leaves the sea and becomes part and parcel of cause and effect. That is the point where one makes the decision to be human. I would say that, in general, a case that is completely low tone (not as we know it, but as we shall conceive of it not too shortly), this case cannot always decide to be human. But the decision to be human is basically aberrative in itself. Because one agrees to be partially effect. This is the prime aberration.

MIKE: I was referring especially to past lives. What I am trying to say is, at the time you were born, this time, in what condition were you?

Very good, physically.

MIKE: Well, how near to your present state were you, if I can say it that way?

I was a long way away.

MIKE: So then you do not merely recover the state you had as a child?

As this state was first outlined, and even as the concept has been modified since then, and even as I know it now, one has to approach very close to that original decision to become human. Has to balance one's total structure at that point against all the knowledge, wisdom and the accumulated postulates, even after one becomes self-determined. Thus one never attains an absolute state. One approaches it. The delicate balance still has to be maintained.

With complete self-determinism, as such, this is relatively easy compared to going through birth, letting yourself be burned, losing your eyesight, becoming stupid, and so on. It is harder to become stupid than to become smart. Being smart is the easiest thing to do. Very difficult to be stupid. You have to break communication. You have to disagree on reality, lose affinity— literally take your body asunder— divorce yourself from it. It's a lot of effort— thus for other effects in one's self and society.

Now what is your next question?

MIKE: Would you please use four different voice modulation patterns illustrative of voice control?

I am like a man with a dog, a new type of dog. This dog has green hair, red hair, blue hair and yellow hair. If I begin to do these things, what will it do for you?

MIKE: For me it won't do anything

So why should I do them?

MIKE: Now I can't say it won't be able to do something for me. I suspect this question might be asked of me.

Well, can you do it? Will you be able to do it?

MIKE: Yes.

Then why do you ask me to do it?

MIKE: Just to put it on this tape.

Here I have to reach a decision. I'm not going to be the dog. [laughter] Dr. —— put his stethoscope to my chest and my heart was beating approximately 340. He said, "Lie down, quick!" So I lay down. And he put his stethoscope to my chest again. It was beating around 32. [laughter] He got three physicians, Dr. —, Dr. —, Dr. —, brought them in. He took an X-ray. The nurse took a blood sample. He listened again. Up and down and up and down. I had more damn fun than a barrel of monkeys. [laughter] That's the last time. He explained it on the basis of drugs. He said I was still narcotized to a certain extent. And I agreed.

MIKE: Well, at the further expense of asking you to be a dog, and you don't want to be, I'll put this proposition to you. Would you like to multiply thirty eight thousand, six hundred—

No. [laughter]

MIKE: Would you answer my last question, or consider it? For you, what is a control center?

A control center, as such, exists in many component parts of my body. For me, at the moment, there is a perfect balance between the major control centers. Now, by throwing this balance off, I can profoundly affect my activities, motions. I can do so deliberately, with an effort, as it were.

A super control center is a new thing. I think it's actually an evolutionary thing. It is my opinion that as we learn more about protoplasm, and how it can affect the higher state, the super control center will be part and parcel of every person's environment, internally. At the present time, I am using both these major control centers, and another which existed in a network, a pattern, within my total nervous system, all in balance. This, in itself, constitutes a major control center.

One of the things I tried to discover, and did so partially, is there a so-called theta control center for each individual in our particular space-time continuum? Apparently there is. I attempted to discover the effects, the laws and rules governing this control center. I was relatively unsuccessful. I do know that they exist. Exactly what they do, I don't know. But for each individual continuum, all of you, there is a theta control center. The word "control center" is not mechanical. It doesn't have any structure. However, it can effect.

TOM: What relationship would you say it would have to— you previously mentioned electromagnetic phenomena?

As I said before, it's impossible for life as I know it to exist without an electromagnetic field. There's a certain resonance, around it or about it...

[recording interrupted while changing tape - some conversation lost]

....that people have died, have brought themselves back into existence again. Incidentally, it's quite easy to explain this on the basis of what [someone] said in his book and what I now know. I'm very acceptable to the idea of rejuvenation after so-called death. I'm— responsible.

If there is a high enough theta endowment in an individual, either as an auditor or as a subject, it might also be possible. When one examines the tales of the people whose hearts have stopped, apparently died, and then brought back to life, the majority of them must be true. Before, I wouldn't have believed this. Now, I do. Certainty is not there; it is belief.

NORM: Have you any means as an auditor, of protecting yourself from tone lowering forces of a low-toned person?

Well, at first I was frankly very much disturbed by counter-emotion being thrown at me. I was highly sensitive to it. I learned very rapidly how to lower the effects of this counter-emotion. It takes an effort to do so, but it can be done. You monitor it, diminish it. An interesting phenomenon is that counter-emotion tends to remain with an object. One can sense counter-emotion, counter-thought, and counter-effort, in a room, or a place, or with an object long after. It is still somehow, in a way I don't quite understand at the moment, a residual effect. Part me and part object

JOE: On that basis, is this a good location for a center?

No, it is not. But it is a location for a center.

NORM: That brings a question to my mind. What have you done in investigating your understanding of time?

I can answer you and say everything possible up to this point. My concept of time was completely altered during the session with Pat, and the following night. I now know what "time" is— put it in quotes! I think each person is so surprised to find out what time is. Gene is getting very close to it. [...pause...] Any more?

TOM: I have two questions. The first one is, are there voids in the MEST continuum where there is no electromagnetic field?

In our solar system, I would say no. Outside of our solar system, I don't know.

TOM: Are you able to change your basic purpose?

There is a genetic purpose built into me, that, if I desire to do so, I can change. Consider, that in many, many years in which to express a basic purpose, to form it and follow it — so has every other person, so has the race. [...pause...] I could change it.

NORM: I have a question. Is there any topic or field in which you do not feel that you have complete choice?

Oh, yes, there are many. My present tone level is such that there are many. How long it shall be until there are none, is a moot point. I continually affect my data in that particular scope, as a maybe, as an et cetera— as a probability factor, with which to compute.

PAT: What is your tone level now?

I tried the other night to see how high I could push it— fairly amazing. Frankly, I was surprised myself. I can also push it down into apathy so quick— boinngg! [laughter] Very simple. A child— what a child does— a child completely monitors his emotions— Mama is a slave, a pawn, pure effect. [laughter]

NORM: How has your family life changed?

Remarkably. Before, it was lousy. Now, it is much better.

NORM: All right— another question? Have you anything to say about how you might feel about war at this time?

I'm agin it. [laughter]

NORM: Any plans about methods of impeding war?

Hmmm... [...pause...] Quite a few. Both primary and alternate, because plans would require modification of my environment to a marked degree, which I am attempting to bring about insofar as I can successfully accomplish it.

NORM: How much concern do you have at this time over income?

None. No fear, worry, anxiety. All my postulates on losing my job disappeared— on not being successful, disappeared. I can do more for any particular person who employs me than any other person possibly could.

NORM: What is the level of your creative ability at this time?

It's much higher than it was. I discovered during a session what creativity was. This is a concept. It is not amenable to words. Most of you shall undoubtedly discover it as you go ahead, if you haven't already done so. Let me say, it is twisting the neck of the goose to make it holler. The neck of the goose, of course, meaning MEST. Very crude analogy. It involves an understanding, conceptually, as a network— of all goals, purposes, emotions, counter-efforts and thoughts in MEST, deposited in MEST. The recognition of what they can do, and then utilizing these things to effect new activities, new goals and new purposes.

One thinks, for instance, of the microphone. The microphone has a basic purpose as defined by man. It receives signals of energy, transmits them along wires. It does so with a certain amount of reproductive fidelity. One could alter the microphone so that it becomes instead a transmitter, even a death-dealing weapon. One can alter the structure of a metal so that it becomes much harder, or softer. One can destroy the entire purpose of the microphone.

MEST is completely flexible within certain limits. Once you believe this, and know it, one becomes a creator. There is no boundary

BETTY: What do you mean, "completely— within limits"?

By agreeing to be human, and by agreeing to accept certain perceptics... Building those perceptics, working with those perceptics, I modify my limitations. I sit; I stay in place. Why do I do so? The limits are that I cannot move out of place, unless gravity permits me to do so. As soon as I can modify gravity, I'll move out. Wood burns at a certain temperature. Where is the agreement? Does MEST, as such, agree with temperature? Where are the effects? Did it rain? Did it snow? How do I feel about it? How long does it take? Where do I put the flame?

I am as inextricably woven with MEST, as the molecules of nitrogen, hydrogen, carbon, oxygen in this particular atmosphere are woven. By being a part of it, I am it. And at the same moment, instantaneously, I am myself. There is a web which extends completely throughout MEST. I am a part of that web. From one standpoint, I am the absolute web; from another, I am only a filament; from another, I don't exist. I choose to take the one in which I am largely modifying MEST. If I choose, I will not modify it. If I choose to modify it, I shall.

Now there are limitations. I have yet to reach the perfect state— in that I conceive of it. When I have reached this state, I can do what I wish— but within the limitations of the master network. The very concept of limitation, I think, should be available to you. Review the things we have talked about, and get the basic premise behind it, if you haven't already.

BETTY: I was just wondering about that business of completeness within those limits....

The word itself, of course, is poor: "completeness." It involves time and measurement.

TOM: Oh, yes. I was going to ask you if those limits include the necessity of lower-order chemical converters?

They won't.

PAT: Are you thinking in terms of theta pulling itself up by its bootstraps? Is your perfect conception —

To be very philosophical— [interrupting]— Quite colloquially, why did theta agree to have a mission in the first place? What is the purpose of theta? How many times has theta accomplished this purpose in the past, or a similar purpose? How many "MEST's" have there been in the past? How many times has theta successfully accomplished a mission with MEST? [...pause...] I'm not high enough yet.

I do know that this is not the first time. Underline both words. There have been other times.

PAT: Do you conceive of a cycle in times?

I don't know yet. Not enough data. At this moment, for me, indeterminate. I can set them up, say, and agree with them, but there's no certainty.

NORM: How much availability of data do you have?— - which you may not have, in this bodily form, sensed, measured or experienced?

I can only use the words, a great deal. I don't know, myself.

I expect in a short "time", as I have said before— six months— fantastic heights. The future is so beautiful— to put it very succinctly— so fascinating. The goal of any self-determined man should always be the future. What can be done in the future is always more than what can be done right now in present time. And availability of data— again that is the question which— no data— guesses, hunches, feelings.... No, there is a certainty that there is more data and will be more data available.

Consider, I think no differently from anyone else, except I'm not tied down. Consider me like a circus tent. I support myself now without the aid of props, tied-down rings or stakes. Whereas the postulated person supports himself with props, tie-down ropes, stakes. He has the same form. Perhaps he blocks off and compartments the circus into various areas, rings, seating arrangements. I no longer have to do this. To me the circus is empty, flexible. I can enlarge the circus or I can decrease the circus. I can also change its color if I care to.

Service facsimiles, as I have said before, can be considered to be clothing. The store of service facsimiles is the closet. You take out the service facsimile and put it on like you do some clothes, when it's necessary to go to a party, to see a friend, to go in bathing. You agree to wear it because it's nice. Everyone else says so too. You wear it long enough so it becomes attached to you. It's a little bit dirty, you think it's wonderful anyway, you continue to wear it.

Along comes processing, or some other environment, and you take off your clothes and put them back in the closet. You get 'em dry-cleaned through processing so you can take them off, and so forth. And after you put all the clothes back into the closet you begin to take a bath. That's processing one's self. After one has done that, one has to decide, as a genuine positive decision, how shall I continue?

For a short period of time I was operating on no service facsimiles. On pure purpose. This was uncomfortable. I lost contact with other people. It was necessary to employ some facsimile, effort, modification of it, in order to get along more comfortably, as I'm doing. However, it is still completely under my control. I can take the clothes out, wear them, put them back eventually. The style of clothing, of course, varies with the age, the society. The depth of the clothing would be warmth or affinity. The analogy can be carried to extreme lengths and still remain accurate. The self-determined individual is able to open the closet at will and close it at will. [...pause...] Have we lost communication again? [laughter]

NORM: Do you have any creative powers over MEST in the sense of, let's say, a piece of space— creating a piece of MEST?

Now come words— power of words. What does a self-determined individual do, when it grows up, with modifications and agreements? How far can a word take one? I'm not being mystical... I'm not attempting to be mystical. What is good communication? All of you know this. You can hear it. You can sense it. You can intuit it.

What is good communication with MEST as a thing, as an object, or as a workable factor? For theta, MEST is only a workable factor. Nothing else. As such, it doesn't exist, for us. More MEST, less workable factor. More theta, more workable factor. Where is the point where it will be all workable factor? I don't know yet. As I modify myself and I lift myself up by my bootstraps, if one must use the expression, I'll know more and more and be more and more certain.

NORM: What sort of experiments have you performed on yourself to determine abilities, or reactions of others? Would you share any of those with us?

One of them is [...pause...] such a simple little thing as sunburn. I wanted to see if I had run out all my sunburn. Then I wanted to see if I could, not having run out my sunburn, recall it deliberately. In other words, injury to the skin.

I ran this out. I had been burned approximately a full year continuously in my life; this is about one twenty-fifth of it. I had one hell of a lot of sunburn to run out. I didn't in time run out that sunburn, but I found, much to my amazement, even now, that I have run out all the sunburn, even though the time element was different. I can take niacin to my heart's content— no more sunburn. Before, I couldn't do this. Wednesday night I loaded myself with 400 milligrams of niacin. No blush. No heat. No pallor. No sunburn. Before, I couldn't even touch this. Ten milligrams, fifty milligrams and I'd have burnt like a furnace for days.

NORM: Have you made any experiments with sleep?

Yes. There's one which I'd like to tell you about. That is alkalinity. As one changes the total pH of the body, one very definitely affects ability and the use of ability. There's a balance between the acid and the alkaline. Bulkley sort of has a clue to this— but it goes farther than he says. I'm attempting to see just how alkaline I can get and still be maximum cause. This may sound odd, but that's what I'm doing.

Also, I've tried to see if I can regenerate teeth. For the moment I've got some very sore gums, but no teeth. Pat suggested to me, in a roundabout way, that I should regenerate teeth. Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, I got some extremely sore gums. Teeth were pulled out. I've regenerated tissue to the maximum extent I can. The soreness is now disappearing. The gums are much more healthy. Next point is, what constitutes a seed tooth? I think it's possible to construct them again.

Another experiment with sleep. You would like to know that I went forty-eight hours without it. There was no diminution of my enthusiasm and my control. But there was a definite lag, physically. The body needs rest, requires it. The rest is breaking up these laminar layers, changing the pH, readjusting left-over endocrines and readjusting fat deposits in the blood stream itself. And a number of other effects. Unless one lies quietly and permits the muscles to do this within themselves, the blood to do it, the nerves to do it, one can continue for as long period of time, undoubtedly, and I'd say possibly two weeks distinctly comfortable, but efficiency and contact would definitely be lowered by the foreign bodies which are not effectively eliminated.

But after these forty-eight hours, I went to bed in the afternoon for two hours and again in the evening for approximately three, and found myself once more quite comfortable. I would suspect that as I grow older and up, I can lower the amount of sleep required. Very disturbing to my wife. And sleep— oh! it's a pleasure. Before, I would go to bed and jangle like wires and constant tension. Always tired. Now, I get to bed and lay down, boinngg! I'm asleep. I wake up. As far as I'm concerned— my body— there's been no passage of time. I awake refreshed, clean, happy and healthy. My wife can't get over it. I used to struggle awake. It was such a job. Nice sympathy I wanted.

PAT: You have stated something about getting physiological tests. Is this to be made available to people, or has the situation been such that it can't? What was your purpose?

I still want to know what I can do. I haven't explored all the possibilities. By no means. It is my definite certainty that the body, as such, in most cases, is the most wonderful mechanism ever devised. The cell, as such, is the most wonderful mechanism ever devised. It has unusual powers, with reference to the past. It has, at this moment, almost infinite powers with reference to the future. What these are I, of course, don't know. I'm rapidly learning.

PAT: I was wondering what the medical doctor reports.

I don't want to be the dog. I insist on not being the dog.

PAT: Did they make any record of this for your use?

No. I asked Dr.—— what the beat was. I knew what it was. He gave me approximately the same data. And they took the X-ray. I fouled them up a little bit. He thought there was something wrong with the X-ray — that I had moved. I let them explain it that way.

I had scar tissue in my lungs, from primary tuberculosis. No more scar tissue. I saw it myself. The X-ray, incidentally, for that original scar tissue is available from the Navy. Activities along the dynamics, as motor activities, are appreciably changed. As goal activities, constantly modified. It's a lot of fun being human— if you know how.

SARAH: How do your children react to you now?

Much better. My little daughter, for instance, had a fear of me which I put into her in the past. I managed to run most of the fear out. She no longer has it.

PAT: How old is she?

She's eight months.

PAT: Can you explain the process? [laughter]

I talked to her. Picked her up. Held her. Played with her. Looked at her for a while, and a few other things, as it were.... Now she's all right. Now, when I come in the door she crawls up to it, instead of running away from it. My son, the same way.

NORM: Do you wake without an alarm clock?

Oh, yes. It's automatic. No trouble there at all. I did that even before. It was getting awake— once I had gotten to that point. [laughter] A very common aberration among working people.

NORM: How does your family group function now? Much smoother?

Yes. Compared with the past, it is— I expect that in a few months it shall be even better.

PAT: I suspect that this will be one of the primary concerns of a great number of people in this connection. If I should choose to become an optimum human being, once again, will I lose the feeling I have toward my family now?

In my reality, no. I would like to suggest to you that, for yours, you won't either.

PAT: This is very good news, I think, for a lot of people. I mean, they will make their reality what they please. This is a fear they've had.

It's very good to be able to love one's children. And very good to be able to love one's wife. But one's children.— it is much better. There's a warmth of feeling you can't possibly describe. The words glow, fullness, grandiose— will never describe it.

NORM: In that first tape I think you mentioned three conditions you consider a person to have to fulfill in order to become optimum. Would you care to reiterate that before this tape runs out?

I can modify these to a certain extent. The main one is desire. The second one is communication and recognition. And the third one is fulfillment.

[recording interrupted while changing tape - some conversation lost]

....it's even simpler than that. Effectively, for purposes of communication and computation, you and I and every other person who is alive are self-determined. This is in the structure of the framework. They are self-determined. But they are not optimum. This is inherent in the theory of self-determinism. Every person here at this moment is self-determined. But do you want to become optimum? That is a different situation.

I have no doubt that, as has been suggested, if you walk up to yourself in the mirror, snap your fingers, you can walk away— completely modified, if you so desire.

Let's take emotion. When should you run out emotion? If there's enough occlusion on a case, running out emotion is necessary. This does not have yet the factor of desire, and effort for that desire. Emotion occludes desire. With high enough self-determinism, this isn't necessary. Walk up to the mirror and walk away.

If self-determinism folds in on itself— impinges on itself— one says, "The laminar layers are still there." They're still effectively operating— cause, effect— effect, cause. If you run out the emotion, both counter and sincere emotion, you pick up the folds and it'll straighten out. Then you've got desire. Desire is concomitant with self-determinism. And that is the first step.

Now you heard on the first tape— how I met my Waterloo at the movie. For the first time in my life I suddenly recognized the folds in my self-determinism. They were there. The process began. It began to unfold. Every person, to repeat this, has only to walk up to the mirror and to unfold them. Now what the mirror may be— I don't know for every person. It could be, as it was for me, a movie.

It could be an automobile accident. It could be the sight of a child. It could be the sun. It could be suddenly a recognition, a concept, a talk such as this, or writing something down. But in each case there has to be this sudden unfolding, and communication.

Now— biochemistry. I am at this moment reading a biochemical textbook, in addition to four others. Some of the basic laws in biochemistry, for me, are false. For others, they may not be. Some of the derivations and conclusions are false. Again, for others, they may not be.

I am not too certain of how many races of human beings there are. There are more than one. Of this I am certain. How many there are, I am not certain. I am in myself a different human being from any other; however, my species, my group, is also different from other species and other groups. The actual protoplasm of which I am composed is slightly different. Thus my biochemistry is not exactly that of other people. Within my group it is. And within myself and others of the same group it is not.

MIKE: Would that group be identifiable, say on such a thing as blood type or something like that?

I think it would be identifiable on a test of the basic molecular weight of protoplasm. The unit that builds another unit of protoplasm would be the basic unit. This block is, I believe, different among species. From one species to another species, it is different. How many of these differences exist, I don't know, but I am certain that they do.

PAT: Would you care to make any statement about your feeling toward the Christian religion or the other religions in general?

No.

PAT: Did you have a basic service facsimile, on yourself, in general?

Yes.

PAT: Would you care to describe that?

The data was from my dear mother, since departed, that my father was always in trouble. He was a no-good— censored. My uncle was also a no-good— censored. He was a dominant. My grandfather repeatedly was a no-good— censored. And my two grandmothers, during several altercations, were no-good— censored. And so I was always in trouble. It was a general facsimile that could have covered almost anything I selected.

PAT: Now was this the basic facsimile?

This was, for me, the basic facsimile, in that it affected more than any other facsimile of my life.

PAT: Did you find that most so-called life continua are built on this one facsimile?

Yes, for me they are.

PAT: Were there others?

A number. They were not so basic, in that they were not total— as this one was.

PAT: Did any of these depend upon data from the so-called genetic chain?

Yes, they did.

PAT: Can you give us an estimate of that?

In comparison with the basic, approximately fifteen or twenty percent.

PAT: Did you have facsimiles for the infliction of pain upon others?

Yes— also more on myself. One of my facsimiles was to punish myself. "I'll get even with you." So I did. Day after day, night after night.

JOE: To what extent would you say service facsimiles for this lifetime are based upon unaccomplished goals in a past lifetime?

For me, again, ten to fifteen percent. For others, of course, I can't answer that. I can sense, in a degree, in an individual, after some conversation and communication, to what degree they are affected. I would say this is accurate, relative to myself— plus or minus ten percent. Relative to an individual— I don't know yet. I can also sense the basic goal of an individual, more than I could last Sunday.

NORM: What is the state of your recalls?

They're not perfect yet, but they seem to be quite good. There are periods where I had shut myself down so completely that recording, of itself, was practically nil. Now I can go back and run out these things and pick up the recording, as such, but it has a different character. It is not the same as in a high analytical moment. I can best express it by saying that it is fuzzy around the edges. It is not clear. It does not have the extremely high sense of reality.

Now this is for me and my species. I do not know how this will affect other species or other people. I will agree fully that there must be different types of high-toned people. Even if the tone is raised, recall still remains slightly fuzzy. Now, if this theory of mine is reasonably correct, this means that there was actual loss of contact at that juncture. Since this existed back in a certain place, one cannot return to that certain place. One can only recall that juncture...

NORM: Another of your present time abilities.... What is your reading speed now, as compared to what it was?

Mighty fast. It's improving, incidentally, every day. I've noticed that, and my wife remarked upon it, that I seemed to be turning the pages about three times as fast as I'd been previously. My comprehension of printed material has gone up enormously, compared with the past. I recall reading Lie theory, and now I read a few paragraphs again, more difficult paragraphs, where there are basic assumptions and correlations on those assumptions— duck soup! No confusion. No identity. No failure. No lack of purpose. Duck soup.

My ability to pick out errors in judgment of other people on paper— much higher. And my ability, of course, to compute within myself, is errorless, based upon postulates. I said, based upon postulates— that I permit to affect me at that time. The "computer" itself is an errorless mechanism. This I am certain of.

PAT: How do you find your field of physical chemistry now?

I have never discovered a cave with aboriginal drawings in it— but when I opened my physical chemistry text book, I did. [laughter] I have at home this very moment, lying on top of the table, Samuel Glasgow's Elements of Physical Chemistry. I've been re-reading it— [...pause...] and the age of science has not yet opened. [laughter]

The child has more intuitive knowledge about the world than the adult scientist, if the child is reasonably high-toned. At one time I was in that state, for a period of approximately two years. There were peaks, of course, and there were valleys. There were moments when I as an individual was higher than I am right now. And certainty was absolute. There were no goals impossible to achieve. I was right. My ability to solve a problem was complete. I could do it. I was me. I was a strong force. My heart sang and the stars were alive.

Then I went to school.

It may sound like a jest, but it's not. Our educational system is one of the finest methods of controlling society of which I know. And the most insidious. It's somewhat like the draft. In the [seventeen?] seventies, one drafted by virtue of force, onto a man-of-war, people from a village. You walked into a village with a group of sailors, to a bar, to the street, shanghaied, waylaid— as they said, bucked a person onto the ship. Now we do it more legally. But it's just as absolute and just as certain. It still works. The same way with education. In the olden days, it was the power of the chief, who had a strong arm, his bow, or his knife. Now society, our schools, our agreements, and our mores— we still do it.

The group as such doesn't exist yet, until the goal is a common goal, a common reality. Someday the group shall exist. There shall only be one and no other. No other is possible. But this day unfortunately is far in the future.

NORM: What would you recommend for the people acquiring skill in this endeavor, considering your educational views?

I think that at the present time there exist compatible techniques to produce as many high-toned people as will permit themselves to become high-toned. The communication of these techniques has been very good in auditing itself. I think the best way to learn them is to be audited, at the present time. Unless one runs out all the postulates against education, against particular ideas or theories, against being helped, against being self-determined— long list— the best way is to be audited. It started that way. That was a very intelligent thing to do. They started auditing. It was very unintelligent to set up a school. They should have continued auditing. It would have taken longer, but the results would have been better. Of course, all the objections, primary and secondary, to this arise immediately. If you want them you can have them. So can anyone else.

One doesn't teach a child anything. The child agrees to a method of behavior. Agrees to a method of response; agrees to a method of control. That's all we do in our grammar schools, high schools and colleges. The student agrees to a method of control and nothing else. If he's high toned, self-determined— he's successful. In being creative to a certain extent, and being successful to a certain extent, he learns, within the structure of the control system, to do as he is supposed to do. In this way he is self- determined. But this isn't optimum.

NORM: I anticipate questions concerning your remark that everyone is self-determined.

Use the same method I used. I cannot teach you anything. As I said in the other tape, I can't buckle, nor tie, nor comb. This is inherent in the theory— theory, I say?— fact.

Now there are certain things even beyond what has been said— that I have since discovered or aligned for myself— in theory, in counter-effort, counter-emotion, in processing and in running. These things I shall leave for others to find, also. For me, they have reality and they have effect. And I shall utilize them.

There is— the next step, actually, beyond present-day, present time, self-determined processing, I discovered this morning while walking over a little hummock of snow.... [...pause...] It was the result of approximately two days straight computation on the subject. It is a new step.

The cycle of history is now being returned back into the spiritual area. We have, first of all, spiritual, then the material, then loss, then regaining of the material and then the spiritual. I think we're now entering the spiritual field again. [...pause...]

Come on.... Communication....

SARAH: Would you expand on your views on education?

If I were going to teach a child how to control MEST, I’d start about it in this wise: I’d get a set of blocks. I’d label the blocks…. One, that is carbon; another, nitrogen, another, hydrogen; and so on down the atomic scale. I’d say "Here. Play with these; have fun. Do what you want." The child now familiarizes himself with MEST and a label. Now I say to the child one evening, "Let’s you and I play a game. I want to show you how things are made. How all things are made." Now I’ll arrange them in a certain way. I’ll put, for instance, two ‘C’ blocks and two ‘O’ blocks together. Now I’ll say, "Believe it or not, this is a gas." Now I’ll put, possibly, two ‘O’ blocks together, and I’ll say, "See this— this is all around you." And so on.

Now I’ll go up the scale into more complexity. Then I get to a point: "So far, these things have just been blocks; they don’t move; they don’t do anything. I’m going to show you how they produce motion, how they have life," and so on. I’ll start dropping the blocks; I’ll throw them; I’ll arrange them in a configuration and kick at them. I’ll do all sorts of things with them. The child will eventually get the idea. Then I’ll substitute another set of blocks so that there’s not too much identity— rename them. In this case I put in simple anions, cations, a couple of radicals and go up the scale.

Perhaps I use color instead of words. Perhaps I use a group of sounds instead of even color. I’ll communicate in any way I can so long as I lose identity continuously and so long as I communicate in the most optimum manner. And thus I shall educate the child.

At some time the child will get curious and say, "Daddy, that stuff on the page, what is that?" "Them’s words. Don’t pay too much attention to them. They’re just things like your blocks. They don’t mean anything unless you want them to. I’ll teach you what they mean. If you accept it, fine. If you don’t— that’s strictly your business." Then we’ll go on.

Eventually the child will learn all about history, all about man, all about science, all about philosophy, all about life, all about himself. How am I going to do this? In present time society it’s practically impossible. You’d have to retire to Alaska, Canada, Africa, someplace. Possibly the tip of the Andes mountains. Just so long as I can have isolation, some privacy and a chance to bring up the child. Bring up! Not destroy! That’s what I would do at the moment.

If the child wanted education— good deal. If the child refuses education— good deal again. The child is a self-determined individual. I respect that. I also respect the humanity, the inherent dignity, the sanctity of being human. This is probably my prime ethical directive.

There is a sanctity in being human, because you, as a human being, are able to select goals and responsibilities for those goals that lift the world out of the doldrums. They’d lift MEST out of chaos and bring order to things. This is the highest possible goal. When this is accomplished…. […pause…] where is the next step?

First we have tribes. Perhaps just people— then they went into tribes. The tribes went into nations, and the nations went into the world. Worlds went into solar systems and solar systems into— how far can you go? Shall one cosmos someday step across to the other cosmos and say, "Hello, Brother! Here I am"? Where in time shall this be accomplished?

What is the basic purpose of all of us as a group? The group does not yet exist. Some day it shall. I would like to feel, as a belief, that basic purpose is true unity at the optimum stage. And what that is I do not know. I can only guess. That's why the future in itself becomes the most fantastically beautiful thing anyone could ever want. The future IS our gift. It is that which we have which distinguishes us from all animals. It makes us different.

Get this carefully— the future is your heritage. Mine also— for being human. We have one goal— the future. That's why we decided to become human— the future. And if you ignore it you pervert and destroy your own humanity. If you accept it and work for it— you're on your way, boys and girls. You're over the hump. There now— I've got mystical enough.

PAT: Have you agreed to envision anything that's possible?

Not yet.

PAT: You set up certain limits?

The words in themselves.... Of course, within the limits of the English language, it is a paradox. With modification it is not. For me, at the moment, anything and everything is possible. Only one arbitrary— I deliberately put this in— time. Now, if I become other than what I am, in the optimum state, I may remove the arbitrary. Then anything, in an instant, is possible. But all the data I have, without any postulates, just as facts, point out to me that at the moment this is not possible. And there is the paradox.

PAT: But you have agreed to this paradox?

No, I haven't agreed to it. I've only modified it. Within the structure of the English language (I have said this before) this is a paradox. I point out to you again: the data available. Examine what I have said and it is no longer a paradox. All of your structure, your motion, your goals and purposes, make this (I over-use the word) possible. The theory of self-determinism (again, in present time, using current terminology) says, "This is possible." [...pause...]

If anyone says to any of you, "What is this person like?", don't give him the attitude that I am a new-found clam on a foreign seashore, or a bright stone, or a new type of wood, or a suddenly found closet full of strange and wonderful things. I'm no different from any other person, except that, to the best of my knowledge, with all the data from the past integrated with the present and extrapolated into the future, I am now acting at the optimum for me. As such, I have no more power, prowess, than you or any other person.... Very simple. You can do the same if you want to. Now for the heavy, down-trodden and poorly laden.... [...pause...]have hope, brother, have hope!

What is good communication? Can you feel it? Can you sit at this table and sense the goals, purposes, desires, needs, causes and effects of every individual in the room? Everyone has them. Everyone has shields, but all up— some of them down.... They go up and down, up and down. Whenever survival data come along they pop down— that's you. [laughter]

I asked the question before. How long can you stay in communication? For the person as I was before, I say it was approximately a minute.

[recording interrupted while changing tape - some conversation lost]

....for me now, it is continuous. This involves, of course, recall— obviously. It is part of your structure. It involves optimum behavior— optimum survival structure. And any other mechanical details attendant to it.

Betty, do they call you? You haven't asked any more questions. It's approximately twenty minutes since you've actually asked a sincere question.

BETTY: That's right.

Don't you have any more?

BETTY: At the moment, no.

As a female you have a unique position in asking questions. [...pause...] You're different from the boys.

BETTY: I think someone disagrees. [laughter]

Now all the males have asked questions, and you have heard them, of course. Perhaps they have asked questions that you were not interested in.

BETTY: They have— including many of them I thought were sort of foolish.

What is there to life, basically, that over a period of approximately fifty thousand years an individual has not experienced? We've been here before.

BETTY: Well, then, what you must not have would be termed....

Nothing.

NORM: Is it that you set yourself up a situation of such a nature that the only way you are able to, in terms of the situation you set up, withdraw, is by carrying out such activities as are present and obvious within the MEST universe? Such things that have been mentioned as going to the stars, ordering MEST, conquering MEST, and that only after you have conquered MEST, in terms of the situation you set up, you will be able to....

That's right. I would like to achieve my goals in my present existence. I think I shall. In doing this I shall have to reorder my environment to a degree never before attempted, or, actually, achieved.

BETTY: But you don't do that by conquering!

I didn’t say I did.

BETTY: Well, I thought that was the indication.

He used the word, "conquer". Who holds in servitude? Who's the slave? The idea of slavery, conquering, mission— absurd. There's only cause and effect. In sheer isolation, I am pure cause. And that's my goal— basic. Now you can make of this what you will. If you will examine it from day to day, from week to week, from month to month, your actual concept of it shall change.

It has already changed for me, and it shall again change in the future. The word "isolation" describes as best I can, again using words, what I wish to communicate.

You know, I have said in the past I had done many things, had read many books and many stories, had been a good many places. I find that, looking back, I hadn't been there, hadn't read them, hadn't done them. I only thought I had. Again I'm being the dog. Possibly a dirty one.

SARAH: What do you contemplate as your duration of life, in time?

In chronological years— if my anti-grav plan works— I would assume approximately another four hundred years. Under present circumstances, one hundred and a quarter.

BETTY: I'm just beginning to know what you did a minute ago to me. I realized right back there when I got sort of hot for a minute— I just realized I had taken off from there because this is a group of men and my goals are different and it's just beginning to start percolating at this particular point just exactly how much difference. The minute you got away from the things which were important to me and my goals at the moment, as I understand them, and went off into something of which I would only have a secondary part, from my point of view, well, I did take off. [...pause...] What's the difference between thinking and knowing?

A play on words, actually. Thinking has, in itself, a time element. But knowing, of course, has no time element.

BETTY: And for thinking you need words, and for knowing, you don't.

Close enough. For me, at the moment, knowing is a little sensation. Thinking is a transitory one.

BETTY: I just went through thinking and finally I got to know— a minute ago. It's a real funny feeling.

Feels good, though, doesn't it?

BETTY: Oh, it's wonderful! I feel like I'm sort of back in communication again now, too. I didn't realize how far I really did keep pushing my chair back— but....

Feel the difference in the room, now?

BETTY: Yeah! It gives me the willies— it's real amazing.... [laughter][...pause...]

I think we can cease with our tape, our record for posterity.

[transcript ends]

Return to "Meetings and Conversations"

Return to "A New Reality"