*Quoted in entirety from John C. Lilly, Simulations of God: A Science of Belief, in preparation, 1972.

When one learns to learn, one is making models, using symbols, analogizing, making metaphors, in short, inventing and using language, mathematics, art, politics, business, etc. At the critical brain (cortex) size, languages and its consequences appear.

To avoid the necessity of repeating learning to learn, symbols, metaphors, models each time, I symbolize the underlying idea in these operations as metaprogramming.  Metaprogramming appears at a critical cortical size — the cerebral computer must have a large enough number of interconnected circuits of sufficient quality for the operations of metaprogramming to exist in that biocomputer.

Essentially, metaprogramming is an operation in which a central control system controls hundreds of thousands of programs operating in parallel simultaneously. This operation in 1972 is not yet done in man-made computers — metaprogramming is done outside the big solid-state computers by the human programmers, or more properly, the human metaprogrammers. All choices and assignments of what the solid-state computers do, how they operate, what goes into them are still human biocomputer choices. Eventually, we may construct a metaprogramming computer, and turn these choices over to it.

When I said we may be our programs, nothing more, nothing less, I meant the substrate, the basic substratum under all else, of our metaprograms is our programs. All we are as humans is what is built-in and what has been acquired, and what we make of both of these. So we are one more result of the program substrate — the self-metaprogrammer.

As out of several hundreds of thousands of the substrate programs comes an adaptable changing set of thousands of meta-programs, so out of the metaprograms as substrate comes something else — the controller, the steersman, the programmer in the biocomputer, the self-metaprogrammer. In a well-organized biocomputer, there is at least one such critical control meta-program labeled I for acting on other metaprograms and labeled me when acted upon by other metaprograms. I say at least one advisedly. Most of us have several controllers, selves, self-meta-programs which divide control among them, either in time parallel or in time series in sequences of control. As I will give in detail later, one path for self development is to centralize control of one's biocomputer in one self-metaprogrammer, making the others into conscious executives subordinate to the single administrator, the single superconscient self-metaprogrammer. With appropriate methods, this centralizing of control, the elementary unification operation, is a realizable state for many, if not all biocomputers.

Once one has control over modelling the universe inside one's self, and is able to vary the parameters satisfactorily, one's self may reflect this ability by changing appropriately to match the new property.

The quality of one's model of the universe is measured by how well it matches the real universe. There is no guarantee that one's current model does match the reality, no matter how certain one feels about the high quality of the match. Feelings of awe, reverence, sacredness and certainty are also adaptable metaprograms, attachable to any model, not just the best fitting one.

One can conceive of other supraself metaprograms farther out than these, such as are given in Olaf Stapledon's The Star-maker (Dover, New York, 1937). Here the self joins other selves, touring the reaches of past and future time and of space, everywhere. The planet-wide consciousness joins into solar systems consciousness into galaxy-wide consciousness. Intergalactic sharing of consciousness fused into the mind of the universe finally faces its creator, the Starmaker. The universe's mind realizes that its creator knows its imperfections and will tear it down to start over, creating a more perfect universe.

Such uses of one's own biocomputer as the above can teach one profound truths about one's self, one's capabilities. The resulting states of being, of consciousness, teach one the basic truth about one's own equipment as follows:

In the province of the mind, what one believes to be true is true or becomes true, within certain limits to be found experientially and experimentally. These limits are further beliefs to be transcended. In the mind, there are no limits. (Lilly, 1972).

In the province of the mind is the region of one's models, of the alone self, of memory, of the metaprograms. What of the region which includes one's body, other's bodies? Here there are definite limits.

In the network of bodies, one's own connected with others for bodily survival-procreation-creation, there is another kind of information:

In the province of connected minds, what the network believes to be true, either is true or becomes true within certain limits to be found cxperientially and experimentally. These limits are further beliefs to be transcended. In the network's mind there are no limits.

But, once again, the bodies of the network housing the minds, the ground on which they rest-, the planet's surface, impose definite limits. These limits are to be found experientially and experimentally, agreed upon by special minds, and communicated to the network. The results are called concensus science.

Thus, so far, we have information without limits in one's mind and with agreed-upon limits (possibly unnecessary) in a network of minds. We also have information within definite limits (to be found) with one body and in a network of bodies on a planet.

With this formulation, our scientific problem can be stated very succinctly as follows:

In this book I try to show you where I am in this search and research.  In previous books I have dealt with personal experiences. Here I deal with theory and methods, metaprograms and programs.

J.C.L.

February, 1972 Los Angeles, Calif.

This work is the result of several years of personal effort to try to understand the various paradoxes of the mind and the brain and their relationships. It is felt that the basic premises presented in this work may help resolve some of the philosophical and theoretical difficulties which arise when one uses other viewpoints and other basic beliefs.

Some of the major philosophical puzzles are concerned with existence of self, with the relation of the self to the brain, the self to the mind, and self to other minds, the existence or non-existence of an immortal part of the self, and the creation of and the belief in various powerful phantasies in these areas of thought.

In Man there is a basic need for imagining wish-fulfillments. Man's wishful thinking becomes interwoven among his best science and even his best philosophy. For the intellectual and the emotional advancement of each of us we need certain kinds' of ideals. We also need ways of thinking which look as straight at the inner realities as at the physical-chemical-biological outer realities. We need truly objective philosophical analysis inside ourselves as well as outside ourselves. This work is a summary of a current position in progress to try to attain objectivity and impartiality with respect to the innermost realities.

One might well ask where is such theory applicable? Once mastered, it may be directly applied in self-analysis. If one remembers that one's self is a feedback-cause with other human, beings, one can start at this personal end of the system and achieve beginnings of interhuman analysis by analyzing one's self first. If successful, one may see one's self operating in improved fashions with other people, as judged by one's self and, much later, as judged by others. The reflections of one's intellectual and emotional growth later may begin to be distributed and are then seen operating in one's interhuman transactions — with one's wife, children, relatives, colleagues, and professional and business contacts.

The persons who can understand and absorb this kind of theory need understand over a broad intellectual and emotional front. Each one needs understanding and training in depth in multiple fields of human endeavor. Those persons who probably can understand it best are the general scientists.* Among those in this group to whom I have presented the theory, there was immediate understanding and an immediate grasping of the basic fundamentals and of the consequence of the theory.

* A general scientist (as defined for purposes of this discussion) is a person trained in the scientific method and trained in watching his own mind operate and correcting his scientific as well as philosophical and pragmatic errors. In a sense he is a scientist who is willing to study more than just one narrow speciality in an attempt to grasp as much knowledge-as he can under the circumstances from other fields than his own. He has a grasp of symbolic logic and of mathematics which he can apply to problems other than his own scientific speciality.

A second group who have no difficulty with the computer aspects but who may have difficulty with the subjective aspects is that large group of young people who are becoming immersed more and more in computers, their use and programing. A few of these may have the necessary biological and psychoanalytic background to understand this viewpoint. Additional training may be given to these few in self-analysis itself.

Several members of a third group may find it useful with further study, the classically trained psychoanalytic scientists.

The psychoanalytic group may have difficulties in that very few are trained in the general purpose types of thinking involved in general purpose computers.

There are difficulties in the way of a multidisciplinary group, as a group, to use this theory. It seems necessary that each individual absorb the necessary kinds of thinking and kinds of motivations involved in each of the fields represented. Members of such groups can motivate one another to do individual learning in these areas and can help one another learn in these various areas. It is up to each responsible individual to absorb enough to gain understanding on the levels presented.

As with most, insights into the innermost realities, it is felt that many of the advantages of this viewpoint cannot be seen directly until this way of thinking is absorbed into one's mind. The thinking machinery itself is at stake here. Once absorbed and understood I have found it possible to see that the properties and the operations of one's mind in many different states can be accounted for somewhat more satisfactorily. With the resulting increased control over conscious thinking and preconscious computations, with the newly enhanced respect for one's fixed unconscious (as if built-in) programs, the integration of one's self with the deeper inner realities becomes more satisfactory.

It is expected that this theory will be useful in understanding and in programming not only one's self but other minds as well. Enhancement of the very human depths of communication with other minds may be approached. The current limits and the attainable limits for education, for reprogramming, for therapy and for cooperative efforts of all sorts between men, may be aided in the terms here presented. This is at least a hope of the author. Only time and use of this kind of thinking can test out the further working hypothesis.

One fact which must be appreciated for applying this theory is the essential individual uniqueness of each of our minds, of each of our brains. It is no easy work to analyze either one's self or someone else. This theory is not, cannot be, a miracle key to a given human mind. It is devilishly hard work digging up enough of the basic facts and enough of the basic programs and metaprograms controlling each mind from within to change its poor operations into better ones. This theory can help one to sort out and arrange stored information and facts into more effective patterns for change. But the basic investigation of self or of other selves is not easy or fast. Our built-in prejudices, biases, repressions and denials fight against understanding. Our Unconscious automatically controls our behavior. Eventually we may be able to progress farther. It may take several generations of those willing to work on these problems.

Respect for the Unknown is hard to come by. Support for a science devoted to the Innermost Unknowns is needed.

In general there are two opposing and different schools of thought on the basic origins of systems of thought or systems of mathematics. In a simplified way these two extreme positions can be summarized as follows:

2. The opposing school at the opposite end of a spectrum of schools, as it were, makes the metatheoretical assumption that thinking systems arise from intuitive, essentially unknowable, substrates of mental operations (Hilbert, 1950). This school states that new kinds of thinking are created from unknown sources. Further, one is not able to arrive at all of the basic assumptions on which systems of thinking operate. Many of the assumptions from this point of view must be forever hidden from the thinker. Thus in this view the origins of thinking are wide open. With this metatheoretical assumption one can then conceive of the existence in the future of presently inconceivable systems of thought.

3. There is an intermediate position between these two extremes in which one assumes the existence of both kinds and that each of these two extremes has something to offer. Thus one can select kinds of thinking which are subject to formalistic analysis and formalistic synthesis based upon basic beliefs. But this does not include all thinking. Some kinds continue to be based in unknown areas, sources, and methods. Metatheoretical selection is being done by selection of the formal kind of thinking from a large universe of other possibilities. This position does not state that the origins of the basic beliefs are completely specifiable. However, once some related basic beliefs are found to exist, a limited system of rules of combination of the basic beliefs giving internally consistent logical results can be devised for limited use of that system. This organization into a limited integral system of thinking and the selection of those basic beliefs which naturally fit into such systems of thinking, is a way of dividing off this territory.

Among many other metatheoretical ways of looking at one's own thinking machine and its activities is one which considers the unknown origins of basic beliefs and finding those whose origins are unknown. The whole problem of origin and the whole problem of how one constructs basic beliefs is at stake here.

If one takes a naturally occurring, thinking mind and obtains a sufficiently large sample of its thinking, one can have a metatheoretical faith that one can then find the basic beliefs and their origins. I am not too sure that such metatheoretical faith in one's ability to adequately observe, adequately record, and adequately analyze mental events and construct them into logical explanations is warranted. With certain areas of thinking one can do this, with certain kinds of minds one can do this, but are not these the minds which have been organized along the known metatheoretical pathways? Are not these the minds which believe implicitly in metatheoretical terms in a basic set of beliefs and operate with them in an obvious direct logical fashion?

Thus our major interests are in those metatheoretical positions which remain as open as possible to reasonable explanation and reasonable models of the thinking processes of the origins of beliefs, of the origins of self, the organization of self with respect to the rest of the mind, and the kinds of permissible transformations of self which are reversible, flexible, and introduce new and more effective ways of thinking.

If there is any truth in this statement then we should be doing a whole set of experiments on the adaptability and the seeking of the proper environment, proper peculiar diets, proper relation of sleep-wakefulness, light to dark, amount of various kinds of radiation, amount of noise, amount of motion, and so forth for mutants at each stage in their life cycle. In other words, we should experiment with all of the vast parameters in which we have evolved and their variations in order to seek optimal survival values of these for the embryo, fetuses and children who do not survive under our peculiarly narrow range of values of these parameters. To change lethals to optimals seems possible and even probable with imaginative and thorough research.

One can conceive of an infinity of other environments populated with other viruses, bacteria, and complex organisms in which Man as such could not survive in his present form. One could also conceive of our genetic code (as given) generating organisms who could and would survive and progress under those new conditions.

Until we have thoroughly explored this genetic code, until we can specify the organism and the conditions under which it can reach maturity, and become an integral individual, we will not have the data necessary for specifying all of the characteristics of the human computer which are brought to the adult from the sperm-egg combination.

We have not tested our own range of adaptability (as integral adults) to all possible environments. Scientifically we have little experience with the extreme; we know something of the extremes of temperature, of air and of water in which we can survive. We know something of the radiation limits within which we can survive. We know something of the oxygen concentrations in the air that we breathe, we know something of the light levels within which we can function. We know a little of the sound levels in which we can function, arid so forth. We are beginning to see how the environment interlocks with our computer and changes its functioning. We are beginning to see how certain kinds of experiences with these conditions set up rules which we call physical science within our own minds. We are beginning to see how, if we change the external conditions, in a limited way within a limited piece of apparatus, that these rules must be changed in order to understand how we can model! these changed conditions and the way that atoms, molecules, radiation and space behave, in our own minds. This century has seen vast advances in our modeling of radiation, material particles of matter, space, stars, galaxies, solid materials, liquids, and our small modifications of all of these. This century, however, has not seen a similar gain in our understanding of the operations of our own minds, of the essential origins of thinking, and of those conditions under which we can elect to create new thinking machines within our minds.

In this century we have begun to appreciate some of the powerful and special organizations of matter which are our essential organisms. The advances in the last fifty years in biochemistry, in genetics, and in biophysics and molecular biology are the beginnings of a new control of these distributions of matter within ourselves.

Schrodinger* said that the chromosome (which contains the linear genetic code) to a physicist is a linear two-dimensional solid; along its length it has a great strength and yet it is a flexible chain which can move and which can be split down the middle during mitosis. These carriers of the orders for our ultimate structure as an integral adult, their essential immortality in being passed from one individual to the next in creating the next individual in line, should not be neglected in any theory of the operation of our mind. It may be that our basic beliefs, the unique ones of each one of us, can be found by careful correlations between our essentially unique genie maps and our thinking limits. It may be that the kinds and levels of thinking of which each of us is capable is essentially determined by the genes which are contained in each of us. It may be-that each of our private languages is genically determined. Even if this is true, that there is genie determinism in regard to our thinking machines, we are not yet at the point at which we can specify the levels of abstraction and the cognitional and theoretical entities which are genically controlled.

Of course in this discussion we are entering into difficulties brought about by the phenotype-genotype differences. These will have to be taken into account as will all of the other mechanisms so laboriously worked out and discovered in the science of genetics. But these rules of genetics must not be limiting in the metatheory; they must enter as part of the knowledge of these talented individuals and at the correct level of abstraction for seeking the patterns of thinking which are genically controlled.

This group of mathematicians in order to create a mathematics or sets of mathematics beyond the capacity of any one individual, held meetings three times a year and exchanged ideas, then went off and worked separately. The resulting papers were published under a pseudonym because the products of this work were felt to be a group result beyond any one individual's contribution.

However, in certain areas, gifted, talented, intelligent individuals seem to function almost autonomously as solitudinous computers giving rise to new findings. This is seen in the case of the mathematical geniuses raised in isolation. One is almost afraid to educate such people for fear that they will lose their general purpose nature and their ability to make original creative contributions. Somehow or other they have escaped interlock into Man's ever more pervasive social organizations and their demands. As in the case of the creative physicist Moseley, who was drafted and killed in World War I, such talent can be thrown away by the operations of the necessity of interlock in our society.

There is a point of view in the modern world and there are divisions among intellectuals which are wasting our use of talent and genius. There are antithetical philosophies which cause diversive intellectual activities. It may be that such conflict is necessary for the intellectual advancement of each individual. It may also be completely superfluous and nonsensical. C..P. Snow has pointed out in his writings (especially those about the two cultures) that one kind of social dichotomy about which I speak. The value systems of each intellectual reflect his prejudices, his biases, his blindnesses, as well as his areas of competence. It seems to be a very foolish maneuver to take that which one knows, that in which one is excellent and raise it above the •general intellectual level of all other intellectuals. One technique of raising what one and one's most intimate colleagues know above the surrounding intellectual terrain is to literally dig an intellectual moat around one's field of activity. To dig this moat one demeans and denigrates areas of knowledge and individuals in those fields surrounding one's own field. This kind of activity seems to be almost built-in in our structure as biological organisms.

"The general (purpose) computer is. . .a machine in which the operator can prescribe, for any internal state of the machine and for any given condition affecting it, what state it shall go to next....All behaviors are at the operator's disposal. A program . . .with the machine forms a mechanism that will show (any thinkable) behavior. This generalization has largely solved the main problem of the brain so far as its objective behavior is concerned; the nature of its subjective aspects may be left to the next generation, if only to reassure them that there are still major scientific worlds left to conquer." (W. Ross Ashby, "What Is Mind?" in Theories of the Mind, Macmillan, New York, 1962.)

(a) mental subjective aspects,
(b) neuronal circuit activities,
(c) biochemistry, and
(d) observable behavioral variables.

The sources of information used by the author are mainly

(1) the results and syntheses of his own experiments on the CNS* and the behavior of animals,
(2) the experiences and results of experiments in profound physical isolation on himself,
(3) his own psychoanalytic work on himself and others,
(4) his studies and experience with the design, construction, operation and programming of electronic solid state digital stored-program computers,
(5) studies of analogue computers for the analysis and conversion of voice frequency spectra for man and for dolphin and the on-line computation of multiple continuous data sources,
(6) studies and experiments in neuropsychopharmacology,
(7) research on and with communication with humans, with dolphins, and with both,
(8) study of certain literature in biology (B), logic (L), neuropsychopharmacology (N), brain and mind models (M), communication (T), psychoanalysis (P), computers (C), psychology (O), psychiatry (I), and hypnosis (H) (see References and Bibliography).

The introduction of open-minded, multiple-level, continuously developing, on-line, operational, dynamic, economical, expanding, structural-functional, field-jumping, field-ignoring theory is needed. The applications of this theory extend from the atomic-molecular-membranes-cell levels, though cell aggregational levels, total behavior and mental-cognitive levels of the single organism of large brain size, and to dyadic and larger groups of such individuals.

1. The human brain is assumed to be an immense biocomputer, several thousands of times larger than any constructed by Man from non-biological components by 1965.

The numbers of neurons in the human brain are variously estimated at 13 billions (1.3 times ten to the tenth) with approximately five times that many glial cells. This computer operates continuously throughout all of its parts and does literally millions of computations in parallel simultaneously. It has approximately two million visual inputs and one hundred thousand acoustic inputs. It is hard to compare the operations of such a magnificent computer to any artificial ones existing today because of its very advanced and sophisticated construction.

2. Certain properties of this computer are known, others are yet to be found. One of these properties obviously is a very large memory storage. Another is control over hundreds of thousands of outputs in a coordinated and programmed fashion. Other examples are the storage and evocation of all those complex behaviors and perceptions known as speech, hearing and language. Some of the more unusual properties of this computer are given further along in this paper.

3. Certain programs are built-in, within the difficult-to-modify parts of the (macro- and micro-) structure of the brain itself. At the lowest possible level such programs which are built-in are those of feeding, eating, sex, avoidance and approach programs, certain kinds of fears, pains, etc.

4. Programs vary in their permanence, some are apparently evanescent and erasable, others operate without apparent change for tens of years. Among the evanescent and erasable programs one might categorize the ability to use visual projection in the service of one's own thinking. One finds this ability with a very high incidence among children and a very low incidence among adults. An example of a program operating without change for tens of years one can show handwriting, over a long series of years, to maintain its own unique patterns.

5. Programs are acquirable throughout life. Apparently no matter how old a person is, there is still a possibility of acquiring new habits. The difficulties of acquisition may increase with age, however, it is not too sure that this is correct. The problem may not be with acquiring programs so much as a decrease in the motivation for acquiring programs.

6. The young newly growing computer acquires programs as its structure expands: some of these take on the appearance of built-in permanence. An example of such acquisition of programs in a child is in the pronunciation of words. Once it agrees with those of the parents the pronunciation is very difficult to change later, i.e., there is really no great motivation for the child to change a particular pronunciation when it is satisfactory to those who listen.

8. The inherited genetic programs place the upper and the lower bounds on the total real performance and on the potential performance of the computer at each instant of its life span. Once again we are assuming that the best environment is presented to the young organism at each part of its life span. It is not meant to imply that such an environment currently is being achieved. This basic assumption seems highly probable but would be very difficult to test.

9. The major problems of the research which are of interest to the author center on the erasability, modifiability, and creatability of programs. In other words, I am interested in the processes of finding metaprograms (and methods and substances) which control, change, and create the basic metaprograms of the human computer. It is not known whether one can really erase any program. Conflicting schools of thought go from the extremes that one stores everything within the computer and never erases it to only the important aspects and functions are stored in the computer and hence, there is no problem of erasing. Modifications of already existing programs can be done with more or less success. The creation of new programs is a difficult assignment. How can one recognize a new program once it is created? This new program may merely be a variation on already stored programs.

11. The human computer has general purpose properties within its limits. The definition of general purpose implies the ability to attack problems that differ not only in quantitative degree of complexity but also that differ qualitatively in the levels of abstraction in the content dealt with. One can shift rapidly one's mind and its attention from one area of human activity to another with very little delay in the reprogramming of one's self to the new activity. The broader the front of such reprogramming the more general purpose the computer is. The ability to move from the interhuman business world to the laboratory world of the scientist would be an example of a fairly general purpose computer.

12. The human computer has stored program properties. A stored program is a set of instructions which are placed in the memory storage system of the computer and which control the computer when orders are given for that program to be activated. The activator can either be another system within the same computer, or someone, or some situation outside the computer.

15. The older classifications of fields of human endeavor and of science are redefinable with this view of the human brain and the human mind. For example, the term suggestibility has often been used in a limited context of programming and of being programmed by someone outside. Hypnotic phenomena are seen when a given computer allows itself to be more or less completely programmed by another one. Metaprogramming is considered a more inclusive term than suggestibility. Metaprogramming considers sources, inputs, outputs, and central processes rather than, just the end result of the process (see Fig. 1). Suggestibility names only the property of receiving orders and carrying them out rather than considering the sources, inputs, outputs, and central processes (ref. H. Bernheim, Clark Hull).

17. The brain is defined as the visible palpable living set of structures to be included in the human computer; the computer's real boundaries in the body are yet to be fully described (biochemical and endocrinological feedback from target organs, for example). The boundary of the brain, of course, may be considered as the limits of the extensions of the central nervous system into the periphery. One would include here also the so-called autonomic nervous system as well as the CNS.

20. It is not intended that I be dogmatic in the new definitions of this version of the theory.

Speed in the recording of the ideas is preferred to perfection of the concepts and deriving the ultimate in internal consistency. As the theory grows so may grow its accuracy and applicability. It is intended that the theory remains as open minded as possible without sacrificing specificity in hazy generality. The language chosen is as close to basic English as possible.

22. After and even during evocation from storage, within certain limits, desired attenuations, corrections, additions, and new creations with certain half-lives can be made. These can be done with (fixed but as yet not determinable) half-lives in conscious awareness, and can subsequently be weakened or modified or replaced, to a certain extent to be determined individually. An unmodifiable half-life can turn up for certain kinds of programs subjected to antithetical metaprograms, i.e., orders to weaken, modify or replace a program act as antithetical metaprograms to already existing programs or metaprograms.

24. Some kinds of material evoked from storage seem to have the property of passing back in time beyond the beginning of this brain to previous brains at their same stage of development; there seems to be a passing of specific information from past organisms through the genetic code to the present organism; but, again, this idea may be a convenient evasion, avoiding deeper analysis of self. One cannot make this assumption that storage in memory goes back beyond the sperm-egg combination or even to the sperm-egg combination until a wishful phantasy constructed to avoid analyzing one's self ruthlessly and objectively is eliminated.

25. Apparently not all programs are revisable. The reasons seem various; some are held by feedback established with other mind-brain-computers in the life-involvement necessary for procreation, financial survival, and practice of business or profession. Other non-revisable programs are those written in emergencies in the early growth years of the computer. The programs dealing with survivals of the young self sometimes seem to have been written in a hurry in disparate attempts to survive; these seem most intransigent.;

26. Priority lists of programs can function as metaprogramS. Certain programs have more value than others. By making such lists the individual can find desired revision points for rewriting important metaprograms. In other words it is important to determine what is important in one's own life.

28. The detailed view of certain kinds of non-speech, nonverbal learning programs, i.e., some of the methods of introducing such programs and parts thereof, are exemplified in the work of I. P. Pavlov and of B. F. Skinner. Some of these results are the teaching and the learning of a simple code or language, a code with non-verbal elements (non-vocalized and non-acoustic) with autonomic components (Gordon Pask, 1966). Other motor outputs than the phonation apparatus are used.

The positive (pleasure producing) and negative (pain or fear producing) aspects of the programs and metaprograms strike at the very roots of motivational energies for the computer. One aspect of lysergic acid diethylamide is that it can give an overall positive motivational aspect to the individual in the LSD-25 state. This may facilitate program, modifications, but it also can facilitate seeking pleasure as a goal of itself.

30. Various special uses of the human computer entail a principle of the competing use of the limited amount of total available apparatus. To hold and to display the accepted view of reality in all its detail and at the same time to program another state of consciousness is difficult; there just isn't enough human brain circuitry to do both jobs in , detail perfectly. Therefore special conditions give the best use of the whole computer for exploring, displaying, and fully experiencing new states of consciousness; physical isolation (only with special limited stimulation patterns, if any) (Lilly, 1956) gives the fullest and most complete experiences of the internal explorations. One such extreme condition is profound physical isolation (isothermicity, zero-level visible quanta, sonic levels below threshold, minimum gravitational-resisting unit area forces, minimum internal stimulation intensity, minimum respiration stimulus level, etc.). This condition can give some additional new states of consciousness the "necessary low-level evenness of context" in which to develop. These results are facilitated by minimizing the necessities for computing the present demands of the physical reality and its calculable present consequences (physical reality programs).

Using this principle of the competitive use of portions of the available brain it is important to understand why, for example, a large amount of hallucinating would not be permissible in our present society. If a person is actively projecting visual images in three dimensions from his stored programs, he may not have enough of his brain functioning in ordinary modes to take care of him with regard to say, gravity, automobiles, and similar hazards. He may become so involved in the projection in the visual field that the inputs from reality itself have to be sacrificed and their quality reduced. It is apparently this danger which teaches us to inhibit hallucinations (i.e., visual projection displays) in the very young children.

31. The principle of the competitive use of available computer structure has a corollary: the larger the computer is, the larger the total number of metaprograms and of programs storable, and the larger the space which can be used for one or more of the currently active programs simultaneously operating. The larger the number of actuable elements in the brain the greater the abilities to simultaneously deal with the current reality program and to reinvoke a past stored-reality program. The quality of the details of the reinvoked program and the quality of the operations in the current physical reality are a direct function of the computer's absolute functional size, all other values being equal.

There may be brains which are large enough to simultaneously project from storage into the visual field and also to function adequately in the outside environment. At least conceptually this is a possibility. This partition of the programs among various modes of operation of course are included in our definition of the general purpose nature of this particular computer.

32. The "consciousness program" itself is expandable and contractable within the computer's structure within certain limits. In coma, this program is very nearly inoperative; in ordinary states of awareness it needs a fair fraction of the machinery to function. In expanded states of consciousness the fraction of the total computer devoted to its operation expands to a large value. If the consciousness is sensorially expanded maximally, there is little structure left for motoric initiation of complex interaction and vice versa. If motor initiation is expanded, the sensorial creations are reduced in scope. If neither sensorial nor motor activities are expanded, more room is available for cognition and/or feeling, etc.

33. The steady state values of the fractions of the total computer each devoted to a separate program at a given instant add up to the total value of one. The value of a given fraction can fluctuate with time. The places used in the computer also change.

34. In general there are delineable major systems of meta-programs and of programs competing for the available circuitry. The methods of categorizing these competing programs depend on the observer's metaprograms. One system divides the competitors into visual, acoustic, proprioceptive, emotive, inhibitory, excitory, disinhibitory, motor, reflexive, learned, appetitive, pleasurable, and painful. This system is used in neurophysiology and comparative physiology.

35. Another system of classification divides the competing metaprograms and programs into oral, anal, genital, defensive, sublimated, conscious, unconscious, libidinal, aggressive, repressive, substitutive, resistive, tactical, strategic, successful, unsuccessful, passive, feminine, active, masculine, pleasure, pain, regressive, progressive, fixated, ego, id, superego, ego ideal. This is the system of classification employed by psychoanalysis.

36. Another system divides the competitors into animal, humanistic, moral, ethical, financial, social, altruistic, professional, free, wealthy, poor, progressive, conservative, liberal, religious, powerful, weak, political, medical, legal, economical, national, local, engineering, scientific, mathematical, educational, humanistic, childlike, adolescent, mature, wise, foolish, superficial, deep, profound, thorough, etc. This is a classification which is employed in general by humanitarians and intellectuals.

37. The classifications of metaprograms and/or of programs by the above methods illustrate some useful principles to be included. There is probably a set of better schemes than any of the above ones. Such new systematizations are needed; the principles in this theory may be useful in setting them up at each and every level of functioning of the computer.

The use of the psychedelic agents (such as LSD-25) in the human subject shows certain properties of these substances in changing the computer's operations in certain ways. Some of these changes are mentioned above in passing; a summary of those found in the LSD state empirically are as follows:

1. The self-metaprogram can make instructions to create special states of the computer; many of these special states have been described in the literature on hypnosis.

3. Only taboo or forbidden programs are not fully constructed: there are peculiar gaps which give away the fact that there are forbidden areas. Within realizable limits most other programs can be produced.

4. When one first does enter into the storage systems the way the material is held in the dynamic storage is entirely strange to one's conscious self.

5. Production of displays of data patterns, of instructions, or storage contents, or of current problems can be realized through such instructions. [A "display" is any visual (or acoustic, or tactile, etc.) plotting of a set of discriminative variables in any number of dimensions of the currently available materials.] The motivational sign and intensity can be varied in any of these displays under special orders.

The following description gives examples of the successful uses of and the results with the freedom to program new instructions during the LSD state. It is to be emphasized for those who have not seen the phenomena within themselves that this kind of manipulation and control of one's own programs and its rather dramatic presentation to one's self is apparently not achievable outside of the use ofLSD-25. This amount of control can be said to resemble other ways of achieving control and visual projection but in actual intensity I know of no other way to achieve it. Hypnosis is a possible exception.

In some cases during the eight or so possible hours of the special states of consciousness achievable with the help of LSD-25, the use of visually projected images to aid in seeing the nature of one's own defensive, evasive, and idealization mechanisms can be realized. By means of a mirror for the careful inspection of the body in the external reality (the whole body or the face alone) it is possible to induce a special state of consciousness (or a special program or metaprogram in the use of perception circuitry) in which remembered or unconsciously stored images of self or of others appear on or in place of the body image. Such stored images can be selected within certain limits, manipulated within other limits, or allowed to occur in a free-association context, appearing as parallels of the current thought-stream. The orders to self for the appearance of these phenomena may resemble the post-hypnotic suggestion instructions given during auto-hypnosis, the metaprogrammatic instructions to a very large computer for a certain type of display program with special content to be displayed, and the orders to a large organization to produce a play with many actors operating in one place in space, one after the other, each with an assigned role not necessarily specified in detail. For periods of 30 or so minutes of objective time such projections can be maintained and worked with in the self-analysis context; at the end of this time-interval some fatigue is noted with subsequent stopping of the display. Re-evocation can be achieved by a period of rest from this and similar tasks for a period of 15 minutes objective time. Several such periods can be evoked during a single session.

The negative operations which prevent certain contents reaching access to the display mechanism can be shown to exist by using alternate "acceptable-to-the-ego-ideal" routes to the display program and its projection. For example, material which cannot be projected onto one's own mirrored image, sometimes can be projected onto a color picture of someone else. In some cases the other person in the picture is most suitably and acceptably of the opposite sex (face alone, full body clothed, or unclothed) for the full use of the display of the desired material.

The external reality screens for the projection of the display program in the LSD state thus can be arranged in a set with various dimensions relating each to the others. Among these are: the non-self-real persons; motion pictures of these persons in various states; still pictures of the persons; pictures of self from the past, motion and still, three dimensional and flat; the here-and-now three-dimensional color image of one's face and/or body in a mirror; and finally, the eyes-open or eyes-closed blank unlighted or lighted projection screen.

The blank screen is the most difficult one to work with but is the least "driving" of the group. The blank screen interferes least with one's creative efforts; it takes more program circuitry to create those aspects which can be furnished by the other screens themselves, from the perception mechanisms directly into the projection program itself. The blank screen does not so easily show the "forbidden transitions" except by remaining blank, i.e., more relaxation and freedom to "free associate" with this visual mode is required to project on a blank screen.

At times the cross-model synesthetic projection may help with the blank screen; excitation coming in the objective hearing mechanisms can be converted to excite visual projection. The commonest excitation used here is music; this well-organized patterned input tends to "drive the content by association." For instance, religious music can evoke religious visions constructed in childhood from real pictures, churches and phantasies, etc. Other inputs are voices, one's own real or recorded voice, the voice of another person: these sources can have problems similar to those with the pictures. The high priority program we are calling the external reality program may tend to usurp the circuitry and take over from the projection program with pictures or voices of known and valued persons. This effect interrupts the projection and its free association. In the long run the external reality's content and its connections can be shown to be relevant by continued self-analysis, using the usual techniques of psychoanalysis.

Such interruptions depend upon the individual computer and its conflicts in relation to the projection program versus the external reality program. If there is guilt or fear present, the external sources will attract the energy of the computer back to the external reality. Alternatively, if the level of excitation from the person in the external reality rises above a certain value, the whole computer will be turned to that particular person and his/her vocal output and his/her behaviors.

Purely random noise may avoid these difficulties; it may be a proper acoustically lighted blank screen for cross-model excitation of the visual projections. Initial experiments with in-phase and non-phase noise in the two ears show some new programming possibilities. One pitfall, here, however, is to avoid the initial problem of the programming by the random processes of the noise itself. This tends to result in chaotic programming, i.e., randomness itself can build up to a large intensity within the metaprogramming systems. With adjustment of the acoustic intensity of the two non-phase related noises these effects can be attenuated and the noisily lighted visual screen used for proper projection purposes. Only preliminary experiments have been done in this region as yet.

When sufficient progress with the external reality projection screens of the various kinds (visual, acoustic to visual synesthetic, body image, and others), the elimination or at least maximal attenuation of all modes of stimulation from the external reality allows deeper direct penetration into the unconscious. The rationale here is that more circuitry in one's huge computer is freed up from the external excitation programs and hence more can be devoted to the internal cognitive reality and its analysis. The projection "program" is still used, but in a somewhat different way.

DEFINITION OF EVASION OF ANALYSIS OF METAPROGRAMS

In using the term evasion it is meant to imply a similar concept to defensive maneuvers or defenses of the psychoanalytic literature. However, in addition to the content of these concepts, evasion is defined as any program or metaprogram entered upon to avoid, to hide, or to distort a deeper program or metaprogram which is too seductive or too threatening or too chaotic for the self-programmer at that particular time.

The easily evoked pleasure of the LSD-25 state may become for some persons a major goal. To make sure that one does not get seduced by this induced state of pleasure it is wise to avoid further experiments for several weeks or several months, and reassert the natural accesses to pleasure in one's external reality. The external reality struggle to obtain pleasure from the environment has rules of its own which must be met realistically and with intelligence and balance. Here it is obvious that discipline in the self-metaprogrammer is absolutely essential. Further progress in self-analysis cannot be made without self-discipline.

These findings are very similar if not identical to those found in classical psychoanalysis. Once repressions and denials are released during the analysis, the access of pleasurable activity increases rapidly. The same temptations exist to become a pleasure-seeking organism; however, this tendency too must be analyzed in the classical situation.

When one compares the classical analytical situation to the solitudinous self-analysis situation one must be quite aware of what has been sacrificed in each case. The advantage of the external analyst being present listening to one producing the material is that one avoids some of the pitfalls of solitude in that some of the above evasions can be pointed out rapidly before one became too involved in them. On the other hand the interpretations of the analyst can be a distraction from pursuing in-depth certain aspects of one's own self-analysis. Even solitudinous self-analysis using LSD-25 should be referred back to an external analyst at times when large amounts of powerfully acting unconscious programs have been unearthed. Some programs tend to be acted out after profound solitude and isolation experiences, as well as they do during classical analysis. This is one of the risks and the gambles of this technique. This is why one is cautioned to use subjects who have become sophisticated with regard to psychoanalysis itself.

During one's classical psychoanalysis one begins to modify one's computer and the self-programmer to include many aspects of the methods of computation that one's analyst uses. One accumulates as it were a metaprogram of self-analysis which incorporates a good deal of what one's analyst has to offer with regard to one's own computer. In classical psychoanalytic terms one tends to incorporate many aspects of one's analyst. Once one has a satisfactorily functioning internal analyst, i.e., an analytical metaprogram for the self-metaprogram, one can be launched on one's own and no longer needs the external analyst to the same degree that one did earlier. One's analysis has proceeded from the analyst outside to the analyst inside.

An analogous situation can be seen in the profound isolation and LSD-25 analysis. The foregoing descriptions of the external screens and external projection methods emphasize the relationship between the computer and the external reality. It also ' emphasized that the computer was using certain parts of itself for transformations and projections of data from memory into systems stimulated by energies coming from the external world. It was pointed out that such projections were easier to do than when these systems were not excited by energies coming from the outside world. The major reason for failure to be able to project on the blank screens or to use the apparatus unexcited by energies coming from the outside world is too great fear of what lies underneath below the levels of awareness in the solitudinous situation. Once a large number of these fears have been analyzed and shown to be peculiarly childlike and childish, one can proceed to the next stage of LSD-25 and isolation combined for analysis.

INNER COGNITION SPACE

We have been taught from babyhood that this kind of phenomena in a totally conscious individual is somehow forbidden, anti-social and possibly even psychotic.

One must analyze this metaprogram that has been implanted in one from childhood, examine its rationality or lack of same and proceed in spite of this kind of an interpretation of the phenomena that occur. Once one has analyzed this as an evasion or a defensive maneuver against seeing the true state of affairs one can allow oneself to go on and experience the deeper set of phenomena without interfering with the natural metaprograms. After achieving this level of freedom from anxiety, one can then go on to the next stages. (The programming orders for these inner happenings to take place are worked out in advance of the session, at first written down or spoken into a recorder. Later such orders can be programmed without external aids.)

The content experienced under these conditions lacks strong reality clues. Externally real displays are not furnished; the excitation from the reality outside does not pattern the displays. Therefore the projections which do occur are from those systems at the next inward level from the operations of the perception apparatus devoted to external reality.

The phenomena that ensue are described by one subject as follows: the visualization is immersed in darkness in three dimensions at times but only when one evades the emerging "multi-dimensional cognitive and conative space." One is aware of "the silence" in the hearing sphere; this too gives way to the new space which is developing. The body image fluctuates, appearing and disappearing, as fear or other need builds up. As with the "darkness and the silence" so with the presence or absence of the body image. Progress in using these projection spaces is measured by one's ability to neither project external reality data from storage into these spaces nor to project into these spaces "the absence of external reality stimuli."

One can project in the visual space living images (external reality equivalents) or blackness (the absence of external reality images). One can project into the acoustic spaces definite sounds, voices, etc. (as if external reality) or one can project silence (the absence of sound) in the external reality. One can project the body image also, flexing one's muscles, joints, etc. to reassure oneself the image is functioning with real feedback or one can have a primary perception of a lack of the body image which is the negative logical alternative to the body image itself.

In each of these dichotomized situations one is really projecting external reality and its equivalents (positive or negative). In order to experience the next set of phenomena one must work through these dichotomous symbols of the external world and realize that they are evasions of further penetration to deeper levels.

In one's ordinary experience there are dreams which have something of this quality and which show this kind of a phenomenon.

However, scientifically speaking, it is fairly obvious that one is not doing any of these things and that one's basic beliefs determine what one experiences here. Therefore we say that the ordinary perception spaces, the ordinary projection spaces, are now filled with cognition and conation processes. This seems to be a more reasonable point of view to take than the oceanic feeling, the at oneness with the universe as fusing with Universal Mind as reported in the literature by others for these phenomena. These states (or direct perceptions of reality as they have been called) are one's thought and feeling expanding into the circuit-i ry in one's computer usually occupied by perception of external reality in each and every mode, including vision, audition, pro-prioception, etc.

A small digression here for purposes of clarifying problems of experiencing these phenomena: In addition to the above discussed factors about fears preventing these phenomena from developing, one must also neutralize various clinical psychiatric explanations and judgments about these phenomena. If one assumes that going through these phenomena is a dangerous procedure in that one might become enamoured of them and hence get into an irreversible psychosis, one also can be kept from experiencing these phenomena directly. Since the real necessary and sufficient conditions for the induction of a psychosis are not yet understood, one should not jump to the conclusion that these phenomena themselves are or can cause a psychosis. This has yet to be proven to the satisfaction of everyone in the field. It may be that professional fear is preventing our further analysis of these phenomena. The whole issue of insight into one's own mental processes, the whole issue of self-discipline and inspecting and understanding these processes are at stake here. Those who believe that there is a psychosis impending in all normal people (including professionals) have definite troubles with these kinds of phenomena. Heuristically such beliefs are untenable; such beliefs tend to weaken one's self-discipline under these circumstances and make one rather unfit for such experiences.

A satisfactory analysis of the clinical psychiatric judgments sphere must take place in all trained subjects before proceeding further.

Unless one can move philosophically and scientifically far enough to see the utility of going through these experiences there can be a rapid withdrawal, a faulting out of self from the whole project. One is not willing to undergo the phantasy "dangers" that one sets up ahead of time before going through the experiences. One's fears in this sphere are usually around the questions of whether one will maintain insight into these processes once one has exposed one's self to LSD-25.

Candidly considered one may ask may not this substance under these conditions change my brain and mind structure irreversibly out of my control? The proper controls on whether or not there are permanent changes in brains have not been done on animals' nor on humans' brains. So there definitely is a risk in this area. Is one willing to gamble on this particular risk? It is wise to face up to these questions candidly, honestly, and ruthlessly. One is moving into an area which is filled with unknowns of primary importance. The issue of brain and mind injury is a current and important issue which has not been faced by the enthusiasts for LSD-25. It is an issue constantly raised by those who are opposed to the use of LSD-25. The science of finding out whether or not there is any truth in either side (pro or con) is lacking. The pro LSD-group tries to do spectacular things using it. The con-group looks askance at the enthusiasm of the other group and claims that they have lost their insight and are hedonistically over-valuing the effects experienced subjectively. The contra-group tend to claim brain damage and/or mind damage; the pro-group tends to claim basic understanding of the mind, a new understanding of mental diseases, and a new approach to the psychotherapy of recalcitrant diseases such as alcoholism. (I leave out here the artistic, religious, and philosophical claims.) (See Leary, Alpert and Metzner, 1964.) The turning point between the pros and cons of the use of LSD-25 hinges once more philosophically at the edge of this cognitive-conative projection space phenomena: does one lose one's insight and initiative by going here? This question should be asked and answered scientifically and experimentally.

PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS

As a pragmatic matter one should do self-analysis in the severely attenuated physical reality without LSD-25 for several exposures before using the substance. One must learn not only to tolerate but to like the experience for several hours at a time. One's fears of the unreleased unconscious programming can be attenuated and analyzed during this period.

Training sessions with LSD-25 with another person must be done before it is combined with the profound physical isolation and solitude. During this period training by the external screens and the projections can be done with doses of LSD-25 from 100 micrograms minimum to the tolerated maximum of that individual. During this period one must face the fears of LSD-25 itself and the fears mentioned above of damage to one's brain and one's mind by this agent. One must also face the hedonistic, narcissistic pleasure induction and maintenance possible with LSD-25, and one must make one's own decision about how to handle these pleasures versus those which are brought about in the external reality.

In the profound physical isolation situation one acquires, or one has, or one develops a confidence in one's body to function quite automatically and to take care of itself. The whole problem of air supply, keeping one's face above the water, the action of respiration and of heart, etc., are all turned over to the proto-human survival programs to maintain themselves. All tendencies on the part of a subject to control or to monitor his own respiration or his own heart action should be discouraged. The same applies to the gastrointestinal tract and the genitourinary tract. Insofar as can be achieved automatic operations of these systems should be encouraged. Gradually they will assume their proper low-level expression in the psychic life of the individual subject. Confidence in their continued operation without attention by one's self (by the self-metaprograms) can be achieved. These considerations are particularly important with the LSD-25 as the physical isolation and solitude begin to develop.

In the farthest and deepest state of isolation, one's basic needs and one's assumptions about self become evident. The existence of self and one's belief in the existence of one's self are made manifest. The positive or negative sign of values that one places upon one's self and upon the existence of one's self begins to; show its force and strength. The problems discussed, but generally unfaced in a religious context in the external real world, are faced and can be lived out with a freedom unavailable since childhood.

The problem of the dissolution of one's conscious self by death of the body is studiable. One's evasions of this problem and of facing it can be projected into studiable areas of one's experience. The existence theorem for spiritual and psychic entities is also testable and the strength of one's belief in these entities can be analyzed. Evasions of self-analysis and evasions of taking on certain kinds of beliefs can be tested.

In this area the denial and negation mechanisms of classical psychoanalysis show their strength. Previous analysis can train one to recognize that when data cannot be called up or when displays cannot be constructed or when certain operations cannot be carried out, one can see the cause currently existing. The set of inhibitory and repressive devices in one's computer is hard at work. In such inhibitory and repressive states preprogrammed sets of basic assumptions to be explored are incompletely carried out. One quickly finds areas of the consequences of the assumed beliefs, which one cannot enter or only enters with fear, with anger, or with love, carried over from some other programming.

The essential features and the goals sought in the self-analysis are in the metaprogram: make the computer general purpose. In this sense we mean that in the general purpose nature of the computer there can be no display, no acting, nor an ideal which is forbidden to a consciously-willed metaprogram. Nor is any display, acting or ideal made without being consciously metaprogrammed. In each case of course one is up against the limits of the unique computer which is one's own. There are certain kinds of metaprograms, displays, acting, or ideals which are beyond the capacity of a particular computer. However, one's imagined limits are sometimes smaller than those which one can achieve with special work. The metaprogram of the specific beliefs about the limits of one's self are at stake here. One's ability to achieve certain special states of consciousness, for example, are generally preprogrammed by basic beliefs taken on in childhood. If the computer is to maintain its general purpose nature (which presumably was there in childhood), one must recapture a far greater range of phenomena than one expects that one has available. For instance, one should be able to program in practically any area possible within human imagination, human action or human being.

As explorations deepen, one can see the evading nature of many programs which one previously considered basic to one's private and professional philosophy. As one opens up the depths, it is wise not to privately or publicly espouse as ultimate any truths one finds in the following areas: the universe in general, beings not human, thought transference, life after death, transmigration of souls, racial memories, species-jumping-thinking, non-physical action at a distance, and so forth. Such ideas may merely be a reflection of one's needs in terms of one's own survival. Ruthless self-analysis as to one's needs for certain kinds of ideas in these areas must be explored honestly and truthfully. The rewarding- and positively-reinforcing effects of LSD-25 must be remembered and emphasized; one overvalues the results of one's chemically rewarding thinking.

Once one has done such deep analysis one later finds deeper that these needs were generating these ideas. One's public need to proclaim them to one's self and to others, as if they are the ultimate truth, is an expression of one's need to believe. Insight into the fact that one is enthused because the positive, start-and-maintain, rewarding sign has been chemically stamped on these ideas must be remembered.

An explorer operating at these depths cannot afford such childish baggage. These are disguises of and evasions of the ultimate dissolution of self; the maintenance of pleasure and of life are insisting on denial of death. If one stops at these beliefs, no progress in further analysis can be made. These beliefs are analysis dissolvers. One might call these lazy assumptions which prevent one from pushing deeper into self and avoid expending any great effort in this deeper direction. One of these very powerful evasions is an hedonistic acceptance of things as they are with conversion of most of them to a pleasant glow. Another similar evasion is deferring discussion of such basic issues until one's life after death.

A possibly great spur to work in this area for certain kinds of persons is the acceptance of unknowables and of the unknown itself. A powerful wish to push into the unknown further than those ahead of one in calendar time is helpful in terms of one's motivation at this point. Everyone has his say about the truth in this area. Many other persons would like very much to have one follow their metaprograms. In my own view I would prefer to be a questing mind reporting on some interesting journeys. Insofar as I fail to be this, I, too, am guilty of attempting to meta-program the reader.

In summary then one starts on the deeper journeys, independently, metaprogrammed properly, and relatively safe but without evasions. After having been through some of the innermost depths of self, a result is that they are only one's own beliefs and their multitudes of randomized logical consequences deep down inside one's self. There is nothing else but stored experience.

To claim validity of details beyond myself is not my aim. There probably are those men who are prepared well enough to attempt reproducing what has been done here in themselves. The descriptions are given so that the sources of the human computer theory are available to professionals.

This particular set of existence theorems is selected for experiment for a number of reasons. There are a number of persons (Blum, 1964) who experimented with the LSD-25 state who write as if they believe implicitly in the objective reality of causes outside themselves for certain kinds of experiences undergone with these particular beliefs.

I do not think it wise to espouse either the existence or the non-existence theorem for this set of basic supra-self-metaprograms (Fig. 1). To become impartial, dispassionate, and general purpose, objective, and open-ended, one must test and adjust the level of credence in each of his sets of beliefs. If ever Man is to be faced with real organisms with greater wisdom, greater intellect, greater minds than any single man has, then we must be open, unbiased, sensitive, general purpose, and dispassionate. Our needs for phantasies must have been analyzed and seen for what they are and are not or we will be in even graver troubles than we are today.

Our search for mentally healthy paths to human progress in the innermost realities depends upon progress in this area. Many men have floundered in this area of belief: I hope this work can help to find a way through one of our stickiest intellectual-emotional regions.

Most of these beliefs are ones which have been abandoned in the fields of endeavor called science. Such beliefs continue to be found in the field known as religion. Some of these beliefs are labeled in modern psychiatric medicine and anthropology as superstitions, psychotic beliefs, etc. Other persons present these beliefs in the writings called science fiction.

This set of basic postulates (or beliefs) is conceived and used to program several sessions with LSD-25 plus physical isolation in solitude. Above all these metaprograms to be experimented, upon is one metaprogram of value to this subject: his overall policy is the intent to explore, to observe, to analyze. Hence there is an important additional basic metaprogram: analyze self to understand one's thinking and true motives more thoroughly. This is the conscious motivational strategy. At times this metaprogram dominates the scene, at times others do. The resolve exists, however, to generate a net effect with this instruction uppermost in the computer hierarchy.

EXPERIMENTS ON BASIC METAPROGRAMS OF EXISTENCE

Preliminary to the experiments in changing basic beliefs, many experiments with the profound physical isolation and solitude situation were carried out over a period of several years. These experiences were followed by combining the LSD-25 state and the physical isolation state in a second period of several years. The minimum time between experiments was thirty days, the maximum time several months. [Tables 1, 7 and 8]

Basic Belief No. 1 was made possible by the early isolation results: Assume that the subject's body and brain can operate comfortably isolated without him paying any attention to it. This belief expresses the faith that one has in one's experience in the isolation situation, that one can consciously ignore the necessities of breathing and other bodily functions, and that they will take care of themselves automatically without detailed attention on the part of one's self. This result allowed existence metaprograms to be made in relative safety.

The subject sought beings other than himself, not human, in whom he existed and who control him and other human beings. Thus the subject found whole new universes containing great varieties of beings, some greater than himself, some equal to himself, and some lesser than himself.

Those greater than himself were a set which was so huge in space-time as to make the subject feel as a mere mote in their sunbeam, a single microflasb of energy in their time scale, my forty-five years are but an instant in their lifetime, a single thought in their vast computer, a mere particle in their assemblages of living cognitive units. He felt he was in the absolute unconscious of these beings. He experienced many more sets all so much greater than himself that they were almost inconceivable in their complexity, size and time scales.

Some of these beings (the subject reported) are programming us in the long term. They nurture us. They experiment on us. They control the probability of our discovering and exploiting new science. He reports that discoveries such as nuclear energy, LSD-25, RNA-DNA, etc., are under probability control by these beings. Further, humans are tested by some of these beings and cared for by others. Some of them have programs which include our survival and progress. Others have programs which include oppositions to these good programs and include our ultimate demise as a species. Thus the subject interpreted the evil ones as willing to sacrifice us in their experiments; hence they are alien and removed from us. The subject reported with this set of beliefs that only limited choices are still available to us as a species. We are an ant colony in their laboratory.

The subject assumed the existence of beings in whom humans exist and who directly control humans. This is a tighter control program than the previous one and assumes continuous day and night, second to second, control, as if each human being were a cell in a larger organism. Such beings insist upon activities in each human being totally under the control of the organism of which each human being is a part. In this state there is no free will and no freedom for an individual. This supra-self-metaprogram was entered twice by the subject; each time he had to leave it; for him it was too anxiety-provoking. In the first case he became a part of a vast computer in which he was one element. In the second case he was a thought in a much larger mind: being modified rapidly, flexibly and plastically.

Basic Belief No. 5

In summation, the subjectively apparent results of the experiments were to straighten out a good deal of the "nonsense" in this subject's computer. Through these experiments he was able to examine some warded-off beliefs and defensive structures accumulated throughout his life. The net result was a feeling of greater integration of self and a feeling of positive affect for the current structure of himself, combined with an improved skepticism of the validity of subjective judging of events in self.

The metatheoretical consideration of these experiments and the results are as follows: One supra-metaprogrammatic assumption about these experiments is the formalistic view of the origins of mathematics and of thinking. As was said in the preface, at one extreme of the organization of human thinking is the formal logical basic assumption set of metatheories. These experiments were done with this view in mind and the results were interpreted from this point of view.

Obviously this point of view does not test the "objective" validity of the experiences. It merely assumes that, if one plugs the proper beliefs into the metaprogrammatic levels of the computer that, the computer will then construct (from the myriads of elements in memory) those possible experiences that fit this particular set of rules. Those programs will be run off and those displays made, which are appropriate to the basic assumptions and their stored programming.

Another way of looking at the results and at the metaprogramming is that we start out with a basic set of beliefs, believe them to be "objectively" valid (not just "formally" valid) and do the experiments and interpret them with this point of view. If one proceeds along these lines, one can quickly reach the end of one's ability to interpret the results. One finds that one cannot grasp conceptually the phenomena that ensue. With this meta-theory, this type of experience is not just the computer operating in isolation, confinement and solitude on preprogrammed material being elicited from memory, but is really in communication with other beings, and the influence on one's self by them is real.

One cannot take sides on these two widely diverse epistemological bases. On the one hand we have the basic assumptions of the modern scientists and on the other hand the basic assumptions of those interested in the religious aspect of existence. If one is to remain philosophic and objective in this field, one must dispassionately survey both of these extreme metatheoretical positions.

One basic lesson learned from these experiments is that, in general, one's preferences for various kinds of metatheoretical positions are dictated by considerations other than one's ideals of impartiality, objectivity, and a dispassionate view. The metatheoretical position held by scientists in general is espoused for purposes of defining the truth, for purposes of understanding in their particular compartment of science, for acceptance among other scientists and for each one's own internal security operations with respect to his own unconscious programs. It is to be expected that anxiety is engendered in some scientists by making the above assumptions as if true (even temporarily) in an experimental framework. One can easily be panicked by the invasion of the self-metaprograms by automatic existence programs from below the level of one's awareness, programs which may strike at the existence of self, at the control of self, at the origins of self, at the destinations of self, and of the relations of self to a known external reality.

Possibly one of the safest positions to take with regard to all of these phenomena is that given in this paper, i.e., the formalis-tic view in which one makes the assumption that the computer itself generates all of the phenomena experienced. This is an acceptable assumption of modern science. This is the so-called common sense assumption. This is the assumption acceptable to one's colleagues in science.

Such considerations, of course, do not touch upon nor prove the validity or invalidity of the assumptions nor of the results of the experiments. In order to leave this theory open-ended and to allow for the presence of the unknown, it is necessary to take the ontological and epistemological position that one cannot know as a result of this kind of solitudinous experiment whether or not the phenomena are explicable only by non-biocomputer interventions or only by happenings within the computer itself, or both.

Those who wish to embrace the truth of an alternative set of assumptions as an escape from the basic assumptions of modern science are equally at fault. Those who must find a communication with other beings in this kind of experiment will apparently find it. One must be aware that there are (as in the child) needs within one's self for finding certain kinds of phenomena and espousing them as the ultimate truth. Such childlike needs dictate their own metaprograms.

I am not agreeing with any extreme group in interpreting these results. It is convenient for me to assume, as of this time, that these phenomena all occurred within the biocomputer. I tend to assume that ESP cannot have played a role. At the moment this is the position which I find to be most tenable in a logical sense. I do not wish to be dogmatic about this. I wish to indicate that this is where I stand as of the writing describing this particular stage of the work. I await demonstrations of the validity of alternative existence theorems.

Among all of the languages possessed by one's self some are used to control the metaprogrammatic level in Fig. 1. The self-metaprogrammer exerts control through the personal metaprogrammatic language. This is the language which controls the computer itself, how it operates, and how it computes as an integral whole. Each human computer has a unique private control language in its unique stored programs, stored metaprograms, and stored self-metaprograms. This language is not all shared in the usual public domain of the language acquired in childhood.

In this particular instance one can visualize in Fig. 1 certain levels in and at which the experiments were done in detail. This control language and control of the biocomputer itself can be changed as new understanding of control allows new control. This language has aspects which are nonverbal, nonvocal and can be more emotional and/or mathematical than they are linguistic. Here we are expressing some "linguistic" aspects and some of the 'mathematical" nonverbal experiences. We are limited in this public expression to the consensus non-private language.

In the external reality, stimulus for this statement was a number of keys which the subject had. been carrying around for several years. He suddenly became aware that he had in his life many locks. Thus it was necessary for him to carry many keys. At times these keys were felt as a physical and a mental burden which slowed the efficient operation of his life. These were aspects of the phrase key which were real keys, real locks on real doors to real rooms, real houses, real offices, etc. At that particular moment this seemed to be the epitome of modern civilization: to have doors, to have locks on those doors, and have privileged persons who possessed the keys to open those doors.

The subject next moved from the meanings in the external reality metaprogram to another level in which he internalized this picture of the door, the room, the lock, the key. He visualized his own antithetical metaprograms as existing in rooms separated by doors which had locks on them. He was searching for the keys to open the doors.

As these inner rooms (categories, problems, antitheses) became embodied in the locked door imagined-projected metaphor the subject began to walk through metaprogrammatic storage looking for a key to open the next door into the further recesses of the rooms. As he moved he began to see that the doors were defined as doors by his own computer; locks were defined as locks; and that keys were defined as necessary to open the locks.

He explored many rooms with many different kinds of knowledge in the rooms. The walls slowly began to dissolve, some of them melted and flowed away; other rooms were revealed as solid and the doors with secure locks rather numerous; some keys were missing.

Most of the hypothesized building inside his own mind, however, now became open spaces with information freely available without the former walls between arbitrary rooms of categories. Those rooms, locks, and keys that were left were quite basic to the development of this individual's self-metaprogram.

Some of these rooms were created in childhood in response to situations over which the self-metaprogrammer had no control. These rooms housed ideas and systems of thinking which to this particular subject evoked intense fear or intense anger as he approached with the intent of opening the doors. The locks did not respond to frontal assaults. These rooms turned out to be very difficult to define out of existence in order to have their contents interact with the rest of the metaprogrammatic level.

The subject underwent a frantic and frightened search for the keys to the locks of these strong-rooms. He became alternately fearful and angry. He made several assaults on walls, doors, ceilings and floors of these closed rooms without much success.

He went away from these rooms into other universes and other spaces and left the computer to work out solutions below his levels of awareness.

Later with higher motivational energy the subject returned to the problem of the lock, the doors and the rooms somewhat refreshed by the experiences in the other realms.

Using the transitional concept that the lock is a hole in the door through which one can exert an effort for a topological transformation, one could turn the room into another topological form other than a closed box. The room in effect was turned inside out through the hole, through the lock leaving the contents outside and the room now a collapsed balloon placed farther from the self-metaprogrammer. Room after room was thus defined as turned inside out with the contents spewed forth for use by the self-metaprogrammer. Once this control key worked, it continued automatically to its own limits.

With this sort of an "intellectual crutch," as it were, entire new areas of basic beliefs were entered upon. Most of the rooms which before had appeared as strong rooms with big powerful walls, doors, and locks now ended up as empty balloons. The greatly defended contents of the rooms in many cases turned out to be relatively trivial programs and episodes from childhood which had been over-generalized and over-valued by this particular human computer. The devaluation of the general purpose properties of the human biocomputer was one such room. In childhood the many episodes which led to the self-metaprogrammer not remaining general purpose but becoming more and more limited and specialized were entered upon. Several layers of the supra-self-metaprograms laid down in childhood were opened up.

The mathematical operation which took place in the computer was the movement of energies and masses of data from the supra-self-metaprogram down to the self-metaprogrammatic level and below. At the same time there was the knowledge that programmatic materials had been moved from the supra-self-position to the under-self-controlled position at the programmatic level. These operations were all filed in metaprogram storage under the title "The key is no key."

It was noticed that the necessity for locks and for keys in the real world had to be dealt with. There was an interval of time in which the subject was quite willing to throw all of his keys away and keep all of the real doors of his life unlocked. That was tried briefly and resulted in a theft. This immediately brought home the obvious fact that the external reality programs cannot be controlled by the self-metaprogram. There are other human bio-computers and a real external reality which has unpredictable properties not under the control of the self-metaprogrammer. Therefore there must remain in the supra-self-metaprogram certain rules for conduct of the human computer in the external reality. There must remain a certain modicum of real supra-self control and respect for the external reality's part of the supra-self-metaprogram.

As it was stated elsewhere (Lilly, 1956, Lilly and Shurley, 1960): the province of the mind is the only area of science in which what one believes to be true either is true or becomes true within limits to be determined experimentally. This particular subject saw that the key is no key is a private self-metaprogramming language phrase and should not be applied to the external reality metaprogram nor should it be applied to other human biocomputers (at least without careful consideration of their capabilities and their own supra-self-metaprograms). As it were similar topological transformations under control of the self-metaprogrammer may not yet have developed within the given other person. The kinds of phenomena expressed by this unique private human computer (The key is no key) may be totally inapplicable to others.

Metatheoretically considered, however, the above operation can be re-expressed by a given individual and elaborated and differentiated along other coordinates. For those willing to try these experiments I wish to add a suggestion: It is necessary to explore all aspects of one's body image, one's childish emotional regions, one's real body in various states and with special stimuli in addition to those from the body itself. With such explorative training one can do topological transformations which can result in step-wise changes in metaprogramming and in metaprograms themselves. Bias, prejudice, preconception and intransigence in explicit areas are seen as supra-self-metaprograms which are inappropriate. Until there can be highly motivated mathematical transformations within the areas of control metaprograms, major changes are not made.

The above all-too-condensed summary of these experiments and their results illustrates the linguistic symbolization of mathematical operations; this operation offers a certain kind of shorthand to the human computer. Linguistic symbols can be used for storing symbols which represent whole areas of operations in the computer. The key is no key is a version of the actual operations which it symbolizes. The statement is in the language of the child as the young computer originally stored it. The actual operations taking place in the adult symbolized by the key is no key are a complex rendering of more advanced ideas, some of which are circuit-like, some of which are topological transformations and some of which are in multidimensional matrices.

A given human computer is limited in its operations by its own acquired mathematical conceptual machinery; this is part of its supra-self-metaprograms. Maximum control over the meta-programmatic level by the self-metaprogram is achieved not by direct "one to one" orders and instructions from the one level to the other. The control is based upon exploration of n-dimensional spaces and finding key points for transformations, first in decisive small local regions which can result in large-scale transformations. (This modeling reminds one of Ashby's Design for a Brain, 1954, in which a large "homeostat" stimulated in one small region makes large adjustments throughout itself in order to compensate for .the small change.)

The analogy of the key in the lock is part of this subject's human computer as a child. The lock is now transformed into an n-dimensional choice-point at which one could exert the proper amount of energy in the proper dimensions and in proper directions in those dimensions and find a radical transformation of all the metaprograms in that region of the computer. In a three-dimensional geometrical model of such operations (in which one decreases the number of dimensions so that they can be visualized in visual space) one can think of oddly-shaped rubber surfaces connected on lines, on points and over large areas which are inflated to different amounts and differing pressures so as to fill a very large room. These membranes are of different colors and various regions are differently lighted and the whole is considered to be pulsing and changing shapes but not changing contact between surfaces, lines, or points. One can imagine one's self moving through these complex surfaces. There are various colors lighted from various directions. One hunts for that zone in which one can exert maximum amount of effect in terms of the redistribution of bond energies, over point, line, and surface areas of contact. One may also exert the maximum effect on the differential pressures in the spaces bounded by each of the surfaces where closed.

After sufficient study of this model one discovers that the points of contact between the membranes are not as fixed as when first seen. What one saw at first was a frozen instant of time extending over a long period of time as if the model were static.  Suddenly one realizes that the points of contact are the sharing of portions of these surfaces along appropriate lines at given instants and that these boundaries are changing constantly. One suddenly also discovers that the colors are moving over the surfaces and passing the boundaries. This particular model is a small region in a larger universe filled with such surfaces and intersections and spaces between. One also discovers that the light sources are within certain of these sheets shining through to others and that the hue and intensity are varying according to some local rules.

One moves away from the model and sees that it is filling a universe; one moves back into the model and begins to look carefully at one thin membrane. As the structure of the membrane is revealed and the structure of the intersection between the membrane is seen, it turns out that there is microcircuitry within the membrane at a molecular and atomic level. There are energies moving in prescribed paths (sometimes in a noisy fashion) in multiple directions within the membrane. At the intersections collisions occur (electrons, mesons, protons, neutrons, neutrinos, etc. are moving from one sheet to the other in both directions). Sheets that are immediately adjacent are seen to be doing local computations at very high speed. The intersections are now seen as micromolecular-atomic switch lines, switch surfaces, and switch points.

Thus one finds that the phrase The key is no key has grown into a new conception of a computer. This computer within itself ideally recognizes no locks, no forbidden transitions, no areas in which data cannot be freely moved from one zone to another. At the boundaries of the computer, however, there are still, as it were categorical imperatives. Now. the problem becomes not the boundaries within the computer but the boundaries outside it. By outside I do not mean only the integumentary boundaries of the real body. I mean other sources of influence than through the bottom layer of the external chemical physical reality (Fig. 1). To symbolize this doubt, this skepticism, about the boundaries of the computer and the influences that can be brought to bear upon them other than those coming through the physical-chemical reality, a line is placed above the supra-self-metaprograms and is labeled unknown (Fig. 1).

In the mind of this subject the unknown must take precedence. It is placed above the supra-self-metaprogram because it contains some of the goals of this particular human computer. This exploration of the inner reality presupposes that the inner reality contains large unknowns which are worth exploring. However, to explore them it is necessary (1) to recognize their existence and (2) to prepare one's computer for the exploration. If one is to explore the unknown one should take the minimum amount of baggage and not load one's self down with conceptual machinery which cannot be flexibly reoriented to accept and investigate the unknown. The next stage of development of those who have the courage and the necessary inner apparatus to do it, is exploration in depth of this vast inner unknown region. For this task we need the best kind of thinking of which man is capable. We dissolve and/or reprogram the doctrinaire and ideological approaches to these questions.

Specific example is given: some experiments were done on reprogramming a specific biocomputer (migraine case) in the LSD-25 state.

Under certain special circumstances it has been found possible to program certain trends in perception and project them into the visual space for study. Among such processes are the apparent presence of other persons. One's belief in the reality of of these presences is not at stake here. Unless one purposely intensifies the belief in the reality of these presences, one can detect that they are not existing in the external reality. The safe metaprogram to use is that they exist only in the mind even though they appear to exist outside the body.

In one particular subject migraine was used as an advantageous tracer and a spur to the self-analysis. In this case there were asymmetries of the spatial perception fields. The right side of the visual field was very different from the left side. (What was seen from the right eye was different from that seen with the left eye.) These differences reside in color, in the persistence of afterimages, in the occurrences of scotoma during a migraine attack, etc. (As is well known in the clinical literature such conditions can exist easily forty years or more.) Among these asymmetries there are spatial distortions of the visual system. In this particular case the right eye is more sensitive, has a lower threshold for photophobia and pain in general. The sensations and skin perceptions on the right side of the head are less pleasant and stronger than those on the left. The migraine attack is confined to the right side of the head.

At times correct programming can be achieved in the LSD-25 state so that these cephalic differences can be enhanced, studied, and projected. Recall and living out of past experiences from childhood show a traumatic use of the right side of the head. In the LSD-25 state abrupt physical blows to the right side of the head with violent shrinking away from the source, with right eye closure falling away to the left, and brief apparent "loss of consciousness" was experienced. This is an example of a long-term (apparently) built-in unconscious program. This experience was not elicited without the help of the LSD-25 state nor without the help of abreactions in classical psychoanalysis. All that can be seen of this program during the usual daily e.r. state is the asymmetry of perception.

In thinking about this effect the patient generated a theory of the projections as if it was no projection. The patient states that these are beings from another dimension penetrating through a hole between their and our universes. (This attribution of causes makes no sense unless it is believed implicitly.) Once the intensity of belief in this system is lowered, the critical threshold for the distortion of the perceptual field becomes obvious and the unconsciously programmed projection process becomes detectable. The artificial beings now are no longer that, they are merely distortions of the visual field because of some peculiar development oi the nervous system. The dramatic bringing in of external beings was shown to have a need of its own, a relief from the solitude and isolation. Essential loneliness gives rise to the creation of those beings within this particular person. The necessity of projecting his own anger and fears by the creation of these beings was found in the subsequent analysis.

After these experiences study of these phenomena-without LSD-25 in solitude and isolation showed that the distorted field can be detected by relaxation of vigilance and by free association into the edges of the perceptual spaces using any random sequence of stimuli for the projection energy. Without the LSD-25 the beings or presences do not appear. Peculiar distortions of the perceptual space do appear. These distortions gave the excuse for the projection of the beings. The subject created alien presences out of perceptually distorted noises by means of a belief program. The complex patterns of the noise coming' through the spatially distorted and modified fields of the perceptual apparatus allowed creative construction of figures which satisfied current needs.

These distortions of the field are not static. The effects (maximal to the right) are seen as time-varying functions. Not only is there an apparent geometrical factor fixed to the body coordinates but there is a varying set of factors. It is the latter set that are locked in by an unconscious program for perception and for feelings. For the evocation of these programs in the LSD-25 state the beliefs for the day metaprogram determines the outcome. The patient says to himself the presences seen come from outside me and my program storage. These meta-programmatic orders then are used in his computer to construct and modify whatever apparently comes in to create presences and at the same time to place the presences outside the computer itself. Thus these orders are essentially used twice: (1) For constructing a basic belief about the external reality of the presences and (2) for a display which demonstrates the results of computations using that belief. The belief is used on incoming signals with uncertain or distorted origins. Without LSD-25 this patient finds it difficult if not impossible to program such projections. He cannot use this basic belief counter to the powerful external reality program. It may be possible for him to use this belief without the LSD-25 state in possibly other extreme conditions, such as in the presence of white noise of large magnitude, the hypnogogic state, the dreaming state in sleep, or during hypnotic trance.

This patient says, "With the usual high levels of daylight in the summers or artificial light in the house, with the stimulation-of me by other persons, with the usual high sound levels of e.r., all organized in demanding ways to call upon my purposes (integral to me), I cannot (or will not) program 'alien presences in the e.r.' Nor will I any longer so program 'presences' into other persons, as a consequence of my detection of the fact that I 'unconsciously programmed' presences of my own creation into other persons."

In most cases the unconscious programming is used to project one's own beliefs and "presences" into and onto other persons in the e.r. This is the easiest route to use and the hardest to detect. The detection is difficult because of (1) the resemblance of one human to another, (2) the apparently meaningless "noisy" signals other persons emit in every mode, and (3) the interlocking feedback relations between one's self and the important persons in the e.r. or the apparent but effective e.r. created by telephone, radio, television, motion pictures, books, etc.

Patients can thus have even evocable proof (false) of the reality (false) of their beliefs about another person. It is almost as if one can extend one's own brain-computer into that of another person by feedback and thus use the other as an actor, acting ("out there") the part assigned by one's own beliefs. Naturally, the performance is not perfect (see later Interlock).

If the roles are accepted by the other and acted upon as new programming, unconsciously, one cannot see these processes easily. If the other person asserts himself and opposes the assigned roles, one has an opportunity to examine these processes in one's self.

One can make the following self-assumptions about the above sources of information, in solitude, in the~LSD-25 state.- (1) inside one's own head; (2) from other beings, nonhuman;-(3) from outer space intelligences-, (4) from ESP with humans.

If one assumes a transcendence program, one's computer generates it according to one's own rules for transcendence. Programming can be assumed as if it came from self, or other humans, and/or from other beings. Modern scientists assume that under these conditions information comes only from self, i.e., from storage wholly within the human computer.

It was found empirically that certain aspects of some programs carry the ability to destroy the individual biocomputer, or at least the ability to lead the way into potentially destructive action. A metaprogram to neutralize programs with self-destruction in them is necessary. The use of LSD-25 in self-analysis allows quick penetration to such buried lethality; a definite caution is advised in such use of this technique. Until such unconscious programs are found and thoroughly investigated, and understood in terms of the metaprogrammatic future, personal professional supervision (of a special type) is recommended. Such supervision should be over the whole period of investigation and (in detail) should be before, during, and after a session for at least several days. Some of the instinctual patterns of behavior stirred up in the process of the session apparently must be acted-out in order to be tested, understood and filed properly in the metaprograms for the future plans of the individual. In this phase, dangers to self arise.

The states of the revelation of the implanted deeper programs may involve the stages of childhood plus those presumed to have led Man (as an evolving primate) to civilization itself, and finally those leading into Man's own future beyond present accomplishments. Near the beginning (and sometimes later) of the LSD-25 analyses some survival programs (protohuman) may appear.

These programs include expressions of strong sexuality, gluttony, panic, anger, overwhelming guilt, sado-masochistic actions and phantasies, and superstitions. These are of amazing strength and power over the self-metaprogram. Much of this material is wordless: existing in the emotion-feeling-motivational storage parts of the computer, it usually has only poor representations in the modeling, clear thinking and verbal portions. The LSD-25 allows breakdown of the barriers between the emotional-wordless systems, and the wordfilled modeling systems by means of channeled uninhibited feeling and channeled uninhibited action. (This is one way that the unconscious is made conscious in a sometimes too rapid fashion.) If strong enough, the modeling systems (self-metaprogrammer) can receive the powerful currents of emotion in full force, go along with them, and eventually construct a vigorous operating model consonant with the desired ideal metaprograms but also with emotional power, built-in. If not strong enough, the self-metaprogrammer can be temporarily overwhelmed by the protohuman survival programs.

There is an additional caution in the use of these substances; the self-programmer must be strong enough to experience these phenomena and not make difficult-to-reverse mistakes in reprogramming or difficult-to-correct errors in new commitments in the external world. This is an area of human activity for the most experienced and strongest personalities, with the right training. I do not recommend the use of these methods except under very controlled and studied conditions with as near ideal as possible physical and social environment and as near ideal as possible help from thoroughly trained empathic matching persons. The subject's short-term and long-term welfare must control all actions, all speech, and all transactions between each pair of persons present, unconsciously and consciously.

The point is underscored: any action, facial appearance, word, sentence, tone of voice, or gesture on the part of the attending person can be used by the person in the LSD-25 state in the processes of penetration, elicitation, or reprogramming. Mistakes by the attending person here can have a devastating power and must be scrupulously avoided. Only mature, experienced, previously-exposed persons should be allowed in the e.r. during this critical time. The minimum possible number (1) of persons is best. This one person should, ideally, have been psychoanalyzed himself and have pursued his self-analysis with LSD-25 aid plus physical isolation and solitude. Short of this ideal, high-quality professional psychoanalytic training is a minimum ideal requirement, or careful selection of attending supervisors by such professionals. An exclusion test must be done on any potential attendant or therapist; he or she should have been personally through several LSD-25 sessions with the self-analysis metaprograms as the leading motivating instructions, and have penetrated to and beyond his own buried lethality and hostility. The professional selector should be thoroughly acquainted with such a potential aide, and evaluate the stages through which he or she has passed and achieved "permanently."

At high doses LSD-25 reduces the relative strength of the e.r. program by enhancing the strength of other programs. (This occurs with 200 to 400 micrograms, and starts in the first hour and can continue for four or more hours.) LSD-25 can increase the strength of and activate basic models in storage; it also allows the self-metaprogramming orders (orders stored just before the LSD-25 maximum effect starts) to be carried out. Strong circular programs if present are likely to be replayed. The self-observer participates in the replay, but once again is programmed as relatively weak with respect to the replay program as he was as a baby or child at the time of the implanting episodes in the e.r. The external observer then sees a dramatic, repeat performance, again and again, of new replays.

Each replay is slightly different and gives the outside observer the feeling of a circular course not quite exactly repeating each time. The emotion expressed at first has all the desperate panic of the child; gradually the spectrum of intense emotion can be experienced and expressed progressively. With proper e.r., personnel, and responses from them, progress leads the circle gradually out of negative feelings into the regions of good feelings; the fear and other negative emotions are stripped off the circular program; good feelings are attached to replay; the self finally can see it operate with its new emotion and (possibly for the first time) examine its newly charged (positive) structure as it replays; reduce its importance on the unconscious priority list; and file it as a relic of childhood in the (inoperative or weakly operating) "history" file.

In the analysis of the effects of LSD-25 on the human mind, a reasonable hypothesis states that the effect of these substances on the human computer is to introduce white noise (in the sense of randomly varying energy containing no signals of itself) in specific systems in the computer. These systems and the partition of the noise among them vary with concentration of substance and with the substance used.

One can thus "explain" the apparent speed-up of subjective time; the enhancement of colors and detail in perceptions of the real world; the production of illusions; the freedom to make new programs; the appearance of visual projections onto mirror images of the real face and body; the projections and apparent depth in colored and in black-and-white photos; the projection of emotional expression onto other real persons; the synesthesia of music to visual projections; the feeling of "oneness with the universe"; apparent ESP effects; communications from "beings other than humans"; the lowered Cloze-analysis scores by outside scorers; the clinical judgment of the outside observer of dissociation psychosis, depersonalization, hallucination, and delusion in regard to the subject; the apparent increased muscular strength, and the dissolution and rebuilding of programs and metaprograms by self and by the outside therapist, etc.

The noise introduced brings a certain amount of disorder with it, even as white noise in the physical world brings randomness. However, the LSD-25 noise randomizes signals only in a limited way: not enough to destroy all order, only enough to superimpose a small creative "jiggling" on program materials and meta-programs and their signals. This noisy component added to the usual signals in the circuits adds enough uncertainty to the meanings to make new interpretations more probable. If the noise becomes too intense, one might expect it to wipe out information and lead to unconsciousness (at very high levels, death).

As was stated by Von Foerster ("Bio-Logic," 1962):

GROWTH HYPOTHESIS

2. For these postulated growth effects there is an optimal concentration of the substance in the brain. With less concentration than the optimal there is merely an irritating stimulation of the CNS (below the levels of awareness). At the optimal concentration (in the non-tolerant state) the phenomena of the LSD-25 state occur. This is a phase of initiation of new growth in the CNS. [This phase is a state of mind analogous to that presumed to exist in the very young human (possibly beginning in the fetus or embryo).]

3. If additional material is administered, prolongation of this phase can be achieved within certain limits. With the maintenance of the optimal concentration of substance, this phase is prolonged (hours) until tolerance develops.

4. The phase of developed tolerance is thought to be (in addition to other things) the phase of the completion of the fast new growth. Most of the new biochemical and neurological connections are completed.

5. If continuous maintenance of optimal concentration for many hours (and ? days) after this initial phase is then achieved, growth may continue slowly.

7. If the optimal concentration is exceeded, the substance excites a "stress syndrome" (i.e., adrenal-vascular-G.I. tract, etc.). (This syndrome is separate from the affective results of the LSD-25 state which in certain individuals can cause a stress syndrome. I am not speaking of such individuals. I am speaking of more sophisticated observers who have been through the necessary and sufficient experiences to be able avoid a stress syndrome in the LSD-25 state.)

8. At concentrations above the optimal there can be a reversal of the beneficial effects in the induced stress syndrome. Anti-growth factors are stimulated. Homeostasis is thus assured in the organism. A similar phenomenon can be seen with negative programming during the LSD-25 experience. Reversal of growth may be programmed in by the self-programmer, unconscious metaprograms, or by the outside therapist or other persons.

10. At levels above optimal, the self-metaprogram loses energy and circuitry to autonomous programs; the ego disappears at very high levels.

This complex series of relations shows the delicate nature of the best state for remetaprogramming and of remetaprogramming itself. Until sophisticated handling (of these substances, the self-metaprogram, the person, the setting, the preparation, etc.) can be achieved, careful voluntary education of professional personnel should be done, and done carefully with insight. Selection of persons for training must be diplomatic and tactful; it is a strategy to be carried out cooperatively without publicity. Candor and honesty at deep levels is a prime requisite.

1. LSD-25 facilitates the positive (reward, .positive reinforcement) systems in the CNS. (Tables 4-8, 10 and Figs. 3-9)

2. LSD-25 inhibits the negative (punishment, negative reinforcement) systems in the CNS. (Tables 4-9 and Fig. 9)

3. LSD-25 adds noise at all levels, decreasing many thresholds in the CNS. (Table 2 and Fig. 9)

4. The apparent strengths of programs below the usual levels of awareness increase. (Figs. 3-5 and 9)

Von Foerster ("Bio-Logic," in Biological Prototypes and Synthetic Systems, Plenum Press, 1962) calls attention to the increasing survival times of increasingly large aggregates of connected matter which he defines as coalitions. Living systems are coalitions par excellence. A protozoan is a coalition of atoms and molecules forming membranes and sub-micro and micro structures which reproduce by collecting the same kinds of atoms and molecules from the environment to form new identical individuals. A sponge is a primitive coalition of protozoa with enhanced survival over any one protozoan. A man is a tightly organized coalition of cells, including some mobile protozoa (lymphocytes, macrophages, oligodendroglia, etc.). Von Foerster says that mammalian cells of Homo sapiens may be the most numerous cells on earth, i.e., these cells with their multiple level coalitions have the longest current survival time. (Table 2)

The nature of matter-matter coalitions and cell-cell coalitions and organism-organism coalitions are explored by Von Foerster. For a coalition to exist between any two entities, the dyad is connected by a bond or bonds which reduce the negentropy below the sum of the negentropy of each of the two entities separated (without a linkage). In this view the two entities when in coalition reduce the physical information available externally below the levels of that available from the two entities each unlinked and separated. The coalition as it exists thus appears to be something more than the mere sum of isolated parts.

However, the nature of the linkages in coalitions depends upon the level of aggregations discussed. In a man the coalitions include those between special atoms in spatial arrangements with others (alpha helices, etc.), special cells in spatial patterns (liver, brain, etc.), and organism coalition tissues such as circulatory, lymph, and autonomic nervous systems. The bones assure a maintenance of total form of the net coalition of a person under a one g gravitational field. The continuance of important aspects of the individual for inter-organism coalitions is based on shape maintenance despite g forces, radiation, heat, etc.

The rules within the coalitions at each level are different in that each level is somehow more than the sum of its separated individuals.

For coalitions to develop between individual humans, linkages of various sorts are developed: agreements are reached and thus the sources of new information from each member are reduced. To maintain a dyadic coalition, interlock between the two human computers is developed. Each human to human interlock is unique; but also each interlock is a function of other current and other past interlocks of each member and of learned traditional models.

Coalitions between humans are immense in number and have great complexity in their operations. Each adult individual has linkages extending to literally thousands of other individuals. The amount of time spent on maintenance of linkages is fantastic. The demands on one's self by the various coalitions uses up most of one's awake hours (and possibly most of one's sleeping hours).

With vigorous current e.r. interlock, the human biocomputer is busy with information exchange at all levels [verbal and nonverbal, digital and analogic, etc., (G. Bateson)]. The model projects expectations and predictions continuously as the interlock develops (as in McCulloch's model of the eye, 1961). The real inputs are compared with computed outputs in all modes.

The isolated solitudinous individual does not have a present coalition to work on, in, or with. He projects past coalitions and makes new models by making new coalitions, of the old ones. As such new relationships are established in his computer he settles logical discrepancies between old models and new ones, tends to abolish discontinuities of the logical consequences, his basic belief structures, and, if necessary, he changes the basic beliefs to have fewer discrepancies between the internal models.

Coalitions at all levels (from basic particles, atomic-molecular, to cellular-organismic, to human-human levels) have a polar, opposite, balancing set of forces, energies, drives, motivations. On the basic particle-atomic-molecular coalition level, this set can be called electric charges, with well-known coalitional rules (opposite attracts, like repels, quantal energy jumps^tunnelling effect, etc.). On the biological level of cells, the cell-cell coalitions have multiferous possibilities (such as meiosis, mitosis, fission, fusion, positive and negative tropisms, ingestion, excretion, etc.). As long as a cell has its own structure, it maintains only structural relations between molecules in itself: it is said (Duvigneau) that each and every atom in a cell is eventually exchanged for another new atom. The coalitions of a cell's atoms are temporary and in the mass last a most probable time characteristic of cell and atom types (lead in bone vs. sodium in brain, for example).

At this cellular level electric charges, on the average, establish gradients; the gradients vary with internal reality and external reality states; the atoms move in and move out, more or less rapidly depending on cell parts (nucleus, mitochondria, ribosomes, etc.) and functional locus (intracellular fluids vs. genie structures, etc.).

An intra-organismic cell (in the mammals for example) has coalitions with other cells and with the organism. It has orders about its relations with neighbors, its origins, its meiotic or mitotic future (if any), its motility or sessility, its electrical activity, its chemical activity, where it stays or where it travels and on the average where and when it dies. Each cell is brought under the mass orders of all (of the organism) by carefully regulated rules of feedback and interconnections through chemical, physical and cellular means. The high-speed intercellular neuronal activity system penetrates most of the organism. The intercellular fluid flow penetrates everywhere and bridges the gap between the cell and the blood carriers. The blood system links the basic chemistry everywhere with transport (oxygen from outside, molecules from gut, hormones from pituitary, etc.). At the cellular level in the organism the coalitions are essential, the linkages myriad, and the cell is the well-fed and well-cared for slave of the state (the organism) and is killed if he breaks the orders for his type. Feedback is absolutely limiting here.

At the organism-organism level, the coalitions depend, somewhat like the cellular level, on food, temperature, gravity, radiation, reproduction, one's own structure, individuals of other species of life, individuals of one's own species, communication intra- and inter-species, use of one's own computer (CNS plus), building and use of human artifacts (from tools to skyscrapers to rockets to non-living computers), and the control and the creation "of human relationships (money, credit, politics, science, books, periodicals, television, etc.).

A single human organism can have at least the following coalitions to deal with:

Some essential factors of any and all human-human coalitions are circular feedback, distance rules, positive (attractive) and negative (repulsive) motives, excitation and inhibition rules and limits, and coalition field agreements. Each human coalition is formed in a coalition field surrounded by other coalitions with other individuals and with institutional agents. The connectivity of a given coalition with all other coalitions is multiple and complex. One is born and raised in a coalition field which is dynamic and growing; in this field the coalitions vary over a great range of apparent durations. Some coalitions are made to last beyond a single human lifetime; others to last a few minutes or hours or days or weeks.

The freed bond energy from a broken coalition is used to form new coalitions, or to strengthen others. For example, a resignation is preferable to a firing; a new pair of necessary coalitions can take the place of the old one with overlap and without break in services; or the duties of the old coalition are distributed over others.

The bond energies in human coalitions are of two types: attractive and repulsive; to maintain a viable coalition these links must be excited and inhibited by each member within certain limits of time, intensity, rate, etc. Sometimes a coalition has aspects of two persons pulling one another together with two ropes and, simultaneously, pushing one another apart with two poles; the coalition requires adjustment and readjustment of the two pushes and the two pulls involved. (The double-bind, G. Bateson)

Responsibility continues with human-human coalitions, with interspecies coalitions (from immunity to bacteria, to eating plants and animals, to interspecies communication), with concepts of self (origins, maintenance, progress, destinations), and strong open communication of one's self with one's innermost realities.

In this paper the multiple levels of responsibility and the necessities for a strong autonomous character in order to pursue this research are underscored. In order to function effectively in human society the depths of the mind must be functioning relatively smoothly under the guidance of the self. To develop this degree of smooth function may require strong measures; these measures require strong educated handling.

For approximately the last nine years the author has struggled with the problems of devising working models of the interspecies communication problem at a relatively high structured cognitive level. The major portion of the total problem has been:found to be the author's own species, rather than the delphinic ones. There is apparently no currently available adequate theory of the human portion of the communication network, Man-Dolphin. The lack of such a theory has made it difficult for most scientists to see the reality of the problems posed in the interspecies program.

* Chapter 11 was published in part: Lilly, J. C. 1966. "Communication with Extraterrestrial Intelligence" (1965 IEEE Military Electronics Conf. Washington, D. C, Sept. 1965) IEEE Spectrum 3: (3) 159-160.

The current effort on the part of this author is aimed at devising a program of encouragement for creating some model of the human end of the interspecies system which will illustrate, elucidate, and elaborate the basic assumptions needed to encourage interest and research effort in this area.

Each mammalian brain functions as a computer with properities, programs, and metaprograms partly to be defined and partly to be determined by observation. The human computer contain at least 13 billions of active elements, and hence is functionally and structurally larger than any artificially built computer of the present era. This human computer has the properties of modern artificial computers of large size plus additional one not yet achieved in the non-biological machines. The human computer has "stored program" properties. "Stored metaprograms" are also present. Among the suggested properties are "self-programming" and "self-metaprogramming." Programming and metaprogramming language is different for each human depending upon developmental, experiential, genetic, educational accidental, and self-chosen variables and elements and values Basically the verbal forms for programming are those of the native language of the individual modulated by nonverbal language elements acquired in the same epochs of the development of that individual.

Each such computer has scales of self-measuration and self-evaluation. Constant and continuous computations are being done giving aim and goal-distance estimates of external reality performances and internal reality achievements. Comparison scales are set up between human biocomputers for performance measures of each and of several in concert. Each biocomputerj models other biocomputers of importance to itself, beginning immediately post-partum, with greater or lesser degrees of error.

The phenomenon of "computer-interlock" facilitates mutual model construction and operation, each of the other. One bio-computer interlocks with one or more other biocomputers above and below the level of awareness any time the communicational distance is sufficiently small to bring the interlock functions above threshold levels.

In the complete physical absence of other external biocomputers within the critical interlock distance, the self-directed and other-directed programs can be clearly detected, analyzed, recomputed, re-programmed, and new metaprograms initiated by the solitudinous biocomputer itself. In the as-completely-as-possible-attenuated-physical-reality environment in solitude, a maximum intensity, a maximum complexity and a maximum speed of re-programming is achievable by the self.

In the field of scientific research such a computer can function in many different ways, from the pure austere thought processing of theory and mathematics, to the almost random data absorption of the naturalistic approach with newly found systems or to the coordinated interlocks with other human biocomputers of an engineering effort.

Some human scientists faced with non-human species who have brain-computers equal to or larger than their own, retreat from responsibilities of interlock research into a set of beliefs peculiar to manual, manipulating, bipedal, featherless, recording, dry, air-vocalizing, cooperating-intraspecies, lethal-predatory-dangerous, virtuous-self-image, powerful-immature, own-species-worshipping primates, with 1400 gram brains.

Specifically, human scientists faced with dolphins (with 1800 gram brains) retreat into several safe cognitive areas, out of contact with the dolphins themselves. The commonest evasion of contact is the assumption of a human a priori knowledge of what constitutes "scientific research on dolphins," i.e., a limited philosophical, species-specific, closed-concept system.

Common causes of retreat are too great fear of the dolphin's large size, of the sea, of going into water, of the Tropics, of cold water, etc. Another safe retreat is into the let's see what happens if we do this or the experimental "mucking around" region. Years can be spent on this area with no interlock achieved; successful evasion is thus continued endlessly.

Increasingly and frequently scientists are trying the lets pretend we are non-existent (to the dolphins) observers and do a peeping-Tom-through-underwater-windows on them, commonly called an "ethological approach." This activity also evades interlock research quite successfully.

The dolphin respecting (not dolphin-loving) persons (scientists or not) are the potential interlock group sought; dedication to dolphin-human interlock without evasions is a difficult new profession. The persons I know in this class are few, as of 1965. The few need help: facilities, assistance of the right sorts, privacy, few demands of other kinds, money, cognitive and intellectual back-up, encouragement, enlightened discussions, and, of course, dolphins. This is currently a necessarily lonely profession.

METAPROGRAMS FOR INTERSPECIES INTERLOCK

Among many possible theoretical approaches is one which I call the "participant theorist" approach. The theorist establishes an interlock with a non-human computer by whatever modes are possible, programs himself with open-ended hypotheses of a type thought to encourage him and to encourage the other computer, each to communicate. The resulting interactions between the two computers set up new programs, driven by meta-programs which say establish communication with the other computer. The new theory develops with the new data as each evolves in feedback with the other. Corrections are introduced in context almost automatically by reward-punishment interactions in response to errors on each side of the dyad.

OBSERVATIONS WITH TURSIOPS-HUMAN INTERLOCK: MIMICRY AS EVIDENCE OF INTERLOCK

It has been found [with one non-human species (Tursiops truncatus) with a brain known to be sufficiently large to motivate the human end adequately] that a large daily commitment of hours to interlock is necessary for the human end, the order of 16 to 20 hours of the 24. The days per week must be at least five, and preferably six or seven. After 11 weeks of these hours, an approximate total of 1000 hours of interlock, the communication achieved via non-vocal and vocal channels was quite complex, and at the human end, the theories quite new and operationally successful, from an order-take-orders level to several higher levels.*

* Lilly, J. C. 1967; Lilly, J. C, Alice M. Miller and Henry M. Truby, 1968.| J.A.S.A. 43: 1412-1424.

With dedicated interlock the conscious-unconscious reciprocal! models of each computer in the other become workable within the limits inherent in each participant. The limits set are also conscious-unconscious, at the human end, at least.

Such interlock participation and realistic model building and rebuilding avoid the sterile purity of the approach from the armchair. It assures interlock in most areas, including some interlock even in those areas forbidden to western "civilized man." The total necessities in each mode of expression are presented irrespective of taboos, inhibitions, bad theories, and blocks in either species. Areas to be loosened up are indicated unequivocally by each member of the dyad to the other by powerful methods. If communication attempts by one side are blocked in one area by the other, in many cases search tactics are employed until an open channel is found or until a channel is developed suitable to each end.

Early in the interlock, mutual rules are established regulating the muscle power and force to be used, and areas considered dangerous, the "absolutely" forbidden areas, the first channels to be considered, the limitations on the use of each channel, who is to have the initiative under what conditions, the contingencies surrounding feeding and eating, around sexual activities, arriving and leaving, sleeping, urination and defecation, the introduction of additional members of either species, and the use of props and evasions. The initial phase consumes most of this initial 1000 hours of interlock.

At the other-species end of the system, the selection of individuals for interlock is more hit or miss. We catch dolphins in the wild; we don't know how they select (if they do select) the group for us to catch. There seems to be some selection going on: most of the individuals we have worked with have none of our unconscious-hostility, unconscious-fear programs in their computers; at least not in the hands of our people in the Institute.* Rarely are very old ones caught.

*Communication Research Institute, Miami, Florida arid St. Thomas, U. S. Virgin Islands.

It may be that dolphins in general cannot afford waste of the unconscious circuitry for such useless programs as hostility-fear-to-intelligent-other-individuals. The conditions for their survival in the wild require the utmost in fast and unequivocal cooperation and interlock with one another. The exigencies of air-breathing, of sharks, of storms, of bacterial diseases, of viral illnesses, of man's depredations, and of other factors require exuberance and whole-hearted participation (intraspecies) from each and every individual. Failure to interlock because of fear, hostility or other inner preoccupations leads to quick death and non-propagation of that type of computer.

Dolphins, correctly approached, seek interlock with those humans who are secure enough to openly seek them (at aJJ levels) in the sea water.

With dolphins there are possible and probable interlock channels for humans. Anatomical differences limit the channels, as do human social taboos. Given a human with minimal inhibitions, the necessary sensitivity, skills in the water, courage, dedication, correct programming, and the necessary surrounds and support, there are many channels: sound-production-hearing; muscular-action-tactile-pressure-reception; presence-action-seeing; sexual channels; feeding-eating; and such metachannel problems as initiative in use, cross-channel relations simultaneously with intra-channel control of signals, kinds of signals which can and cannot be decoded into information at each end, etc.

One channel we have disciplined ourselves and the dolphins to pursue is the air-borne vocal and hearing one.* In this channel we have found a clue to progress in the other channels: if one is to be convincing in regard to showing a program and meta-program wish to communicate, one mimics the other end's signals even though (temporarily) the signals make no sense, and one insists on having one's own signals mimicked on the same basis. This leads to mimicry of our swimming patterns by the dolphins, for example, when we have mimicked theirs.

* OP. cit. J.A.S.A. 43:1412-1424.

Mimicry seems to be one program for demonstrations of the present state of the model of the dolphin in us and of us in the dolphin. The adequacy of the functioning of the human in the man-dolphin interlock is measured by the feedback represented by mimicry. The mechanism is similar if not identical to that of a human child mimicking adult use of words (silently or vocally) not yet in the child's "storage" and "use" programs.

In summary, a plea is made for the development of a theory of the communicator, human type, faced with a non-human communicator with a brain and presumed mind of a high quality. The theory should include open-ended, non-species-specific, general purpose, self-programming, mutual respect, voluntary dedication, participant theorist kinds of basic assumptions. Beyond these assumptions are those of the proper selection of participants, support, interest in the scientific community, and cooperation on an operating contributing level by open-minded professionals.

For the sake of clarity the following presentation of the logic employed in this paper is given.

It is quite apparent that there is at least a four-value logic employed. There are the usual 'true' and 'false' values; in addition there is another pair which in a shorthand way can be called 'as if true' and 'as if false.' Each of these four values can be applied to the external reality and to the internal reality of the human biocomputer.

Externally checkable, observable reality, i.e., with external proof, uses the value system: true, false, *true and *false. In the internal reality, i.e., in the area of internal judgment, internal belief, in the self-metaprogrammer, the values are symbolized with quotation marks, "true" and "false" "*true" "*false."

In the internal reality case, for each of these values, there is metaprogram which can be stated as follows: "define as true (or false) a given metaprogram." (In the main body of the paper this is a basic belief for survival, for example.) A less intense metaprogram is "defined as if true a given metaprogram or defined as if false a given metaprogram." In the experiments on basic beliefs, "if defined as "true" then the metaprogram is "true" within limits to be determined," and "if defined "*true" then "true" within limits to be determined."

These various values may be modified with a judgment of their probability and with the defining of the desired intensity. The probability scale is 1.0 for absolutely certain, a gradation of probability down to the value 0 which is improbable and to -1 for impossible. Such values are applied to each of the four logic categories with regard to a specific metaprogram.

Such a logic system can be seen operating in the external human reality in coalitions of various sorts. A coalition can function 'as if an internal judgment' in the sense that it defines certain things as "true" which are then true within limits to be determined. The usual structure of human law seems to share this property. The concept of consensus wisdom (Galbraith) includes this logic system.

There are certain metaprograms and programs which have an imperative, externally-proven truth-falsity relationship which cannot be manipulated within the human biocomputer without danger to its existence. These metaprograms and programs can be considered as imperatives from some parts of the program level of the human biocomputer which must function as supra-self-metaprograms (i.e., there must be recognition of the "built-in," "necessary for survival nature" of these programs).

Some of these true programs are yet to be determined in biological science. The following have been determined: the necessity of obtaining food in response to hunger, the necessity of sexual activities and pleasure, adequate responses to pain and fear (such as freeze, flee/or fight).

Direct physical injury with physical trauma to the body have their own imperatives. The intake of certain gases into the respiratory system must be regulated very cautiously. Among these are oxygen, carbon dioxide, water vapor, carbon monoxide, nitrogen, xenon, krypton, nitrous oxide, and so forth. There are programs regulating the amount of liquid surrounding the body (for example, to avoid drowning), the amount of solids piled on top of the body (to avoid crushing) the total pressures of gases around the body (neither too much nor too little), the level of radiation, the level of elementary particles from outer space, or from artificial sources.

The various kinds of viruses, bacteria, fungi, algae, protozoa, and so forth, must be carefully regulated by proper programming.

Interactions of the human computer with other mammals and with supra-mammalian species must be programmed in an anticipatory way.

There must be regulation of information, the kind of information and the amounts from anywhere and from anyone for the best functioning of the human computer. There are such phenomena as "information-overload" and "information-deprivation." There are multiple programs for the regulation of the individual with respect to the society surrounding him, which have their own imperatives.

Make the following simplifying assumptions in order to investigate some of the complex relationships between the meta-programs, programs and the neuronal activity in the central nervous system:

2. Assume that the particular critical events in each neuron is the firing of an impulse into its axon.

3. Assume a method of control of this firing from outside the CNS.

4. Assume a method of pickup of the impulse discharged which can be transmitted to the outside of the CNS.

11. Store all of the neuronal signs of activity during the time of production of speech and of the writing.

12. In a subsequent time period, play back or call up from storage the patterns which were stored in the same sequence and put them out from the computer over 10^{10 channels into the CNS.}

13. Record the subsequent behavior and compare this record with the previous external record of the behavior when the sentence Was being produced.

14. The present theory states that behavior of the organism during the time of reproduction of the pattern will be very closely identical with the original occurrence of the behavior.

With this model, we can ask many basic questions: for example, what is the physical set of events which gives rise to phenomena in the area of the phoneme, in the area of semantic levels of abstraction, in the areas of metaprogramming outside, and the use of language for programming?

With this technique, evaluation of drug effects on the central nervous system can have meaningful results in terms of the critical physical events taking place in the CNS. Analyses can be made of the kinds of programming and metaprogramming that take place in separate systems of the brain such as the neo-cortex, the meso-, paleo-, and archeo-cortices versus the sub-cortical systems such as the thalmus, the hypothalmus, mesencephalon, etc. A systems analysis is then possible of the limbic system, the positively reinforcing and negatively reinforcing systems, the control of the pituitary, and the feedback control by the contents of the blood of the various parts of the CNS. Evaluation of the feedback relationships between all of these systems can then be specified in a quantitative way.

This formulation objectifies the subjective in a way in which experiments can be designed, not only to store the objective aspects of subjective events, but also to reproduce the subjective events from store. It permits quantitative analysis of the physical aspects of the subjective events outside of the CNS which originally created them.

It also permits of experiments in which a given CNS can control most (if not all) of the functions of a second CNS. The corresponding parts of the second CNS as compared to the first can be found and an evaluation made of the differences in thresholds, in area distributions of thresholds and in analogous areas between the two CNS's.

Human Biocomputer:     Biophysical Analysis and Control of Brain
                                    Activity-Program Levels (Figs. 2-9 & Tables 3-10)

Program Level               relations
Brain Activity Level  

a. The first connection picks up the firing sign (action potential) of each neuron.
b. The second connection furnishes an electrical pulse (10"^ sec. duration) which fires each neuron, no matter its threshold for firing.

(3.0) At any time later, all stored signs are put out through connections (lb) in original sequence.

(3.1) Record resulting behavior of organism for the 1/2 hr. of replay.

III. Is there memory of 2.0 during 3.0? Afterwards?

IV. Are 3.0 and 2.0 remembered as two time periods.and event sequences?

V. Does psychophysical testing with objective records during 3.0 give identical results to same tests (using same time course) during 2.0? (Word test programmed on tapes with step distortions below the threshold for step detection, etc.)

VI. Other than (la) need we store anything else? What about (a) membrane potential of each cell? (b) variations of M.P. over dendritic tree? (c) local concentrations of serotonin, nor-epinephrine, etc.? (d) previous history of firings for how long before chosen 1/2-hour period? (e) blood levels of critical substances? (f) glial activities and concentration of substances?

VII. Other than lb need we control anything else? (See VI list of factors.)

VIII. Are la and lb enough to specify and control, or does molecular signal storage introduce a measure of control independent of neuron firing?

IX. Does such detailed control of neuron firing give control of (a) program level and (b) meta-program level, or is there another set of controlling variables and parameters?

 X. Does this proposed system give control of (a) self-metaprogram and (b) supra-self-meta-program levels? Does this system function as an absolute supra-self-metaprogram?

The self-metaprogram feeds back on itself through the external body image seen in a mirror and through proprioceptive and postural feedbacks.

During the primary state of LSD* it is possible to program in positive system activity during such exercises. Under these conditions the net effect of such stretchings and muscle exercises can be a positive system excitation and reinforcement of the new patterns. During the LSD state it has been noticed that the activities of the negative systems are attenuated and thus allow a greater range of muscle and joint stretching than without the LSD. It has also been noticed that it is possible to contract the desired muscles more fully in this state than during the usual state. Caution must be observed, however, because it is now possible to contract muscles to the point where muscles, joint capsules, ligaments, and tendons can be strained leaving residual, unpleasant local pains after the LSD primary state is ended.

* Experiments with dextro-amphetamine in doses from 40-200 mgs show similar positively reinforcing pleasurable use of muscles, joints, posture-changes, etc., and inhibition of negatively reinforcing painful effects for several hours.

Certain kinds of negative attenuation and zeroing-out metaprograms are connected with pelvic movements. If there is a supra-self-metaprogram directed against the movements of sexual intercourse, these are reflected in body posture and in the range of use of the pelvis in other activities. Such metaprograms can be detected in the projected images (placed upon the mirror image of the body itself) by watching the posture of the projected image and the range of programmable functional movements of the pelvis. The imagined dangers of sexual mating can be seen by the failure of this set of images to go through the full ranges of such motions. Reprogramming such anti-metaprograms requires the real body to go through the "forbidden" movements in order to investigate the anti-metaprograms. In general this requires more or less extreme exaggeration of the real body movements in order to break through the inhibitory aspects of the undesired metaprogram. Each individual will vary from others in the essential details, even as their metaprograms vary. A certain willingness to experience that which is feared most is absolutely essential as a basic metaprogram in order to achieve the new programming.

Cautions, once again, are in order here to avoid the narcissistic-self-worshipping-evasion of reprogramming in this area. The new areas of experience opened up can be rather seductive of themselves, because of the enhanced positive system activity during the LSD state. The necessity for regression and regrowth from times at which the natural developments were stopped can lead to further sticking of the metaprogramming at an earlier age on hedonistic grounds. Additional supra-self-metaprograms insisting-on a natural evolution of the self-metaprogram towards a desired set of ideal metaprograms is necessary here to assure progress.

In older persons with well-developed characters these dangers are not as pressing as they are in younger subjects. However, the self-metaprograms involving the body image are also more entrenched in the older persons. More energy and dedication to the task at hand are needed in the older persons.

One metaprogram which has been worked out in great detail which may be of help to some persons is the set of exercises and dietary rules commonly called Yoga. These exercises assure new areas of stretching and new areas of breathing exercises which can enhance the physiologic functions of lungs and gut tract, as well as somatic musculature, joints, bones, and posture. In many ways these exercises assure adequate massage of the heart and blood vessels in such a way as to increase their activity along healthy lines. It may be that one can reduce the probability of a coronary attack, angina pectoris, and similar problems of the aged. Obviously other organs are also participating including liver, kidneys, spleen, and so forth.

In obesity the panniculus adiposus, the large fat store in the omentum and in the mesentery, severely limit functions of all of the viscera and limit the amount of stimulation that can be given these organs through such exercise. Such large fat reservoirs also require very large amounts of circulation of their own and hence require an increase in blood pressure to force that circulation.

Dostoyevsky in a letter to Nikolai Strakhov.

"For a few moments before the fit", he wrote to the critic Nikolai Strakhov, "I experience a feeling of happiness such as it is quite impossible to imagine in a normal state and which other people have no idea of. I feel entirely in harmony with myself and the whole world, and this feeling, is so strong and so delightful that for a few seconds of such bliss one would gladly give up ten years of one's life, if not one's whole life."

Prince Leo Nikolayevich Myshkin:

1. Communication: the process of the exchange of information between two or more minds.

la. Communication: the process of exchange of information between metaprogramming entities within two or more computers.

2. Information: the calculated mental results of the reception of signals from another mind and the computed composed context of the next reply to be formed into transmissible signals.

2a. Information: the data received, computed, and stored resulting from the reception of signals by a metaprogramming entity from another computer and the computed data in the ready state in the same entity for transmission to another computer through a similar set of signals. -

3. Mind: the entity comprising all of the (at least potentially) self-detectable processes in a brain which are at such a level of program complexity as to be detected and at least potentially describable in programming language; the self-metaprograms within the brain.

3a. Mind: a form of metaprogram in the software set of a very large biocomputer which organizes metaprograms for the purposes of self-programming and of communication.

4. Program: a set of internally consistent instructions for the computation of signals, the formation of information, the storage of both, the preparation of messages, the logical processes to be used, the selection processes, and the storage addresses all occurring within a biocomputer, a brain.

5. Metaprogram: a set of instructions, descriptions, and means of control of sets of programs.

MAJOR METAPROGRAMS

This metaprogram operates programs with interlock with the outside-body-systems. These systems include all of external reality; human beings are a defined part of the external reality.

This metaprogram seems to be absent only in special states and even then possibly is only relatively attenuated, not completely absent. The states in which it is attenuated include sleep, coma, trance, anaesthesia, etc.

The above states cause centrally conditioned reductions of the stimulation arriving from the external reality. It is also possible to attenuate the external reality stimuli themselves.

In the profound physical isolation, external reality excitation of the CNS is attenuated to minimum possible levels in all modes. If in profound physical isolation, one adds a metaprogrammatically active substance to the brain (such as LSD-25), further attenuation of the external reality stimuli can be achieved and the ego (self-metaprogram) is more fully activated. If in profound physical isolation one adds sleep, trance, or anaesthesia (light levels), these give external reality cut-off and cessation of e.r. (external reality) excitation of the central nervous system (and of the "mind").

The external reality metaprogram is increased in its intensity fn high excitation states; interlock with the external reality can be increased by these means.

These metaprograms include all of those entities which are usually defined as ego, consciousness, self, and so forth.

The interlock of the self-metaprograms with the external reality metaprograms can be attenuated by special techniques including sleep, LSD-25 plus isolation, anaesthesia, etc.

The apparent strength of these metaprograms can be enhanced in certain cased by LSD-25 plus dextro-amphetamine, psychic energizers, etc.

The autonomic nervous system has built-in properties which are definitely programmatic rather than metaprogrammatic. The relationships between these and the self-metaprogram are second order. These autonomic programs do not exist directly in self-metaprograms. These programs include the programs for the gastro-intestinal tract, for sex, for anger, for fright, etc. These programs can be modified by the self-metaprogram; once started their detailed carrying-out is automatic.

These are programs which cut across the lines of the previous ones and include such conscious-unconscious programs as the needs and the carrying out of sleep, exercise, correct food, environmental temperature regulations, clothing, etc. The realities of the body maintenance in the external reality are included in these programs.

Depending upon the individual computer there can be many more programs; some may be devised as above, others cut across the above boundaries. Such divisions, in the last analysis, are artificial and reflect the tendency of a human to think and act disintegrated into categories rather than as an integrated smoothly operating holistic computer.

Survival Priorities are used in case of threat to structural and/ or functional integrity of the entities named: the order is that of relative importance in the sense that the one below in the list will be sacrificed, abandoned, penalized, or changed in order to save, maintain, integrate, or educate the one above in the series. A threat is defined as internal (mental) information (which when above threshold) anticipates and predicts immediate or delayed destruction, mutilation, confinement, abandonment, damnation, ostracism, solution (lysis) of continuity, compromised integrity, moral encroachment, severe ethical insult, voluntary seduction, unconscious entrancement, slavery, etc.