Out-Int — Fact or Fiction?

[Dulloldfart]

I was just wondering about something. I haven't (yet) investigated this with auditing at all. I've been taking Hubbard's word for it that all "Ext/Int" troubles come from troubles with Int, and not troubles with Ext. Of course, Hubbard said so, so it must be true, right?

Has anyone found anything hot in terms of these buttons, merely the regular 12 "Int" buttons, but reversed?

1. Go out
2. Went out
3. Put out
4. Exteriorized out of something
5. Want to go out
6. Can't get out
7. Kicked into spaces
8. Can't go out
9. Being released
10. Forced out
11. Pulled out
12. Pushed out

Paul

 

[RogerB]

I was just wondering about something. I haven't (yet) investigated this with auditing at all. I've been taking Hubbard's word for it that all "Ext/Int" troubles come from troubles with Int, and not troubles with Ext. Of course, Hubbard said so, so it must be true, right?

Has anyone found anything hot in terms of these buttons, merely the regular 12 "Int" buttons, but reversed?

1. Go out
2. Went out
3. Put out
4. Exteriorized out of something
5. Want to go out
6. Can't get out
7. Kicked into spaces
8. Can't go out
9. Being released
10. Forced out
11. Pulled out
12. Pushed out

Paul

Yes, my Dear.

You are getting cleverer by the minute.

How about the hung up intention of to "get out," "get away," or even, "be there."

The error in his thing was even expressed in the label of the tech item: Out-Int assumes that the problem is that your interiorization is out . . that your ability to be in is off or out or screwed! What about the happy ability to be "out" . . . . .

Of course the question, again is, out of what?!

I was going to write on this subject and my further observations when I came up for breath . . . .

Basically, my observation is that what was/has been experienced and labeled as "out-int" is actually the suffering of the forces involved in the hung up intentions (again note the plural) of trying to be somewhere . . . of trying to move, be at a different "location."

We've done this trick many times, and been thwarted many times. Hence the amount of accumulated charge, force and stuck flows on the issue.

"Out-int" is an unfortunate misdirector and error based on the limited notion that "in your head is where you began from" or "supposed to be" or "want to or should be" . . . . it totally violates the truth that you as a thetan are naturally more natively "out," and certainly larger than a stupid head!

The real deal is that you should be able to be anywhere and as you choose, when you choose.

Rog

 

[Ted]

I was just wondering about something. I haven't (yet) investigated this with auditing at all. I've been taking Hubbard's word for it that all "Ext/Int" troubles come from troubles with Int, and not troubles with Ext. Of course, Hubbard said so, so it must be true, right?

Has anyone found anything hot in terms of these buttons, merely the regular 12 "Int" buttons, but reversed?

1. Go out
2. Went out
3. Put out
4. Exteriorized out of something
5. Want to go out
6. Can't get out
7. Kicked into spaces
8. Can't go out
9. Being released
10. Forced out
11. Pulled out
12. Pushed out

Paul

Hubbard wrote a PAB about Escape. That is certainly going out or the desire to go out.

If memory serves, he justified how escape could be used as a marketing tool to give people what they want. "Getting all the way out" is a reg tool.

 

[Gottabrain]

Paul and Roger B:

YES YES YES YES YES!!!! to all the Ext buttons

You boys are clever.

I like.

 

[Gottabrain]

Gottabrain,

If it helps, I would say this to you. I am with you in all of (well virtually all )of your comments and observations.

The phenomena you speak of in being blasted out of your chair by mental/spiritual forces in session happened to me twice in the the '60's.

The first time was in 1962 when we were listing for "own Goals."

Of course, the rationale of the process at the time was that we were listing for, and to find, THE thing we were involved in doing on a compulsive and unknowing basis.

Of course, that was flawed from the start . . . . we are doing MANY things on a compulsive, unknowing basis Not just one.

Well, anyway, we got something that was sold to me as "MY GOAL" based on me being belted out of the chair by its force and the apparent meter read at the time.

In actuality, it was an "almost right item," a later lock item on the real deal, but close enough to cause a catastrophic discharge-explosion of my accumulated (pent up) spiritual/mental energy....

...And it is true, as you say, LRH screwed up in his passing of his info onto us. He was less than wise enough, too vain, and too into thinking his truth was the ultimate truth (if, indeed, he believed that :confused2.

And so, many have been hurt by his hubris.

It is also true that many have had some gains from indulging in his materials.

And so it is that we here now sit in judgment of him . . . he had his monster faults while at the same time he delivered some things of value. And thus it is that those who care to can sift through the available data, see him for what he was while also at the same time take and use and benefit from the parts that are useful.

But what is beyond dispute is that the organization he left behind is an insane, even criminal, endeavor that violates all that is decent in conduct between peoples.

RogerB

Roger, I could kiss you.

and Paul. And - yes, Mark Baker - whom I have only begun to get along with. Thanks for letting me know where you're coming from, Mark, and understanding me.

I like what you are doing.

It would be a tremendous waste to not use whatever was good in Scn and not refine it and fix it to improve the field of mental/spiritual health. Its a tremendous huge job. I hope you are all in close touch with Geir Isene as well? He has a number of people also working on this and a great rational, analytical approach.

As for the int/ext thing and being blasted out of my chair:

Int was run on me ad nauseum a tremendous number of times while I was in Scn and the SO. But I never suffered from headaches to any large degree. That last session in the RPF in '86 was my last Int session.

and why/how the blast occurred is explained better to me in physics and I see it as magnetism between two poles (Int pole and Ext pole). The conflict of my getting out goal v being forced to stay there and then charging it up more with the sessions and being kept there longer and longer against my will caused the blast.

Ext buttons. Goals. Being comfortable in locations (apart from this). Spot on.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

and Paul. And - yes, Mark Baker - whom I have only begun to get along with. Thanks for letting me know where you're coming from, Mark, and understanding me.

I'm old, grumpy, cranky, excessively verbose, and a smartass BUT I'm actually pretty easy. I don't take things too personally as a rule & I'm not malicious. We should get along okay.


Mark A. Baker

 

[Dulloldfart]

Yes . . .

How about the hung up intention of to "get out," "get away," or even, "be there."

The error in his thing was even expressed in the label of the tech item: Out-Int assumes that the problem is that your interiorization is out . . that your ability to be in is off or out or screwed! What about the happy ability to be "out" . . . . .

Of course the question, again is, out of what?!

I was going to write on this subject and my further observations when I came up for breath . . . .

Basically, my observation is that what was/has been experienced and labeled as "out-int" is actually the suffering of the forces involved in the hung up intentions (again note the plural) of trying to be somewhere . . . of trying to move, be at a different "location."

We've done this trick many times, and been thwarted many times. Hence the amount of accumulated charge, force and stuck flows on the issue.

"Out-int" is an unfortunate misdirector and error based on the limited notion that "in your head is where you began from" or "supposed to be" or "want to or should be" . . . . it totally violates the truth that you as a thetan are naturally more natively "out," and certainly larger than a stupid head!

The real deal is that you should be able to be anywhere and as you choose, when you choose.

Rog

Hubbard wrote a PAB about Escape. That is certainly going out or the desire to go out.

If memory serves, he justified how escape could be used as a marketing tool to give people what they want. "Getting all the way out" is a reg tool.

Paul and Roger B:

YES YES YES YES YES!!!! to all the Ext buttons

You boys are clever.

I like.

Guess I got a read on that one. Thank you all very much. I'll try and get a revised "issue" posted here later on today, removing many apparently-unnecessary limitations.

This response has to prompt the question, WTF was Hubbard doing when he discarded Ext as a significant factor? Did his prior research include zero or virtually zero auditing of real people? Maybe he audited his BTs on Int as research or something, as he did say in the III materials that they "respond like any preclear."

OK, laterz. . . .

Paul

 

[RogerB]

Roger, I could kiss you.

and Paul. And - yes, Mark Baker - whom I have only begun to get along with. Thanks for letting me know where you're coming from, Mark, and understanding me.

I like what you are doing.

It would be a tremendous waste to not use whatever was good in Scn and not refine it and fix it to improve the field of mental/spiritual health. Its a tremendous huge job. I hope you are all in close touch with Geir Isene as well? He has a number of people also working on this and a great rational, analytical approach.

As for the int/ext thing and being blasted out of my chair:

Int was run on me ad nauseum a tremendous number of times while I was in Scn and the SO. But I never suffered from headaches to any large degree. That last session in the RPF in '86 was my last Int session.

and why/how the blast occurred is explained better to me in physics and I see it as magnetism between two poles (Int pole and Ext pole). The conflict of my getting out goal v being forced to stay there and then charging it up more with the sessions and being kept there longer and longer against my will caused the blast.

Ext buttons. Goals. Being comfortable in locations (apart from this). Spot on.

Well, Gotta . . .

It seems a little truth is going a l-o-n-g waaaay . . .

Well done on your cogs and gains

Rog

 

[Panda Termint]

Paul, Hubbard probably got hung up on Int because it's a kind of negative. It's not the going into things that's a problem, it's the "going in too fixedly" aspect of it.

The one sure Correction List item that tells you the action was unnecessary (or that the guy is done on Int/Ext handlings) is "Did you feel fine about going into things in the first place?"

BTW, what's your assessment of the condition now, is it fact or fiction?

 

[Dulloldfart]

OK. I like this.

I am including an R-factor something like this:

Exteriorization and Interiorization and Just Staying
• If you're a huge Hubbard fan, then sorry, you probably won't like this at all.

• It would seem that by concentrating on *only* Int, Hubbard bypassed a lot of charge. This lack is remedied in this particular Int/Ext/Stay RD, which expands the scope of the limited "Int RD" to include:
(1) Interiorization,
(2) Exteriorization,
(3) Being there (without Inting or Exting),
(4) all of this with regard to space, time, conditions, and things (solid or not).

• If this RD won't run because of past auditing errors or BPC in the area, then it is recommended you fix it by discharging the BPC with a simple Rub & Yawn application on the topic of "My Int handlings" or whatever you think is appropriate.

-----

I renamed this from the Repeater Int RD to the Int/Ext/Stay RD. I still have the same three main steps:

1. Ask straight out for intentions being acted on related to Int/Ext/Staying, then run with Repeater on the hottest as described before; repeat until flat

2. Assess Int/Ext/Stay buttons, take the hottest one, and ask for intentions related to that button, then Repeater on the hottest as above; repeat until flat

3. Go from flattened specific incidents and try and pick up any intentions not yet addressed from those. Repeat until flat.

-----

The Int/Ext/Stay buttons I've got right now are:

Regular Int buttons, re time, space, conditions, things
1. Go in
2. Went In
3. Put in
4. Interiorized into something
5. Want to go in
6. Can't get in
7. Kicked out of (whatever)
8. Can't go in
9. Being trapped
10. Forced in
11. Pulled in
12. Pushed in

Reversed Int buttons, re time, space, conditions, things
13. Go out
14. Went out
15. Put out
16. Exteriorized out of something
17. Want to go out
18. Can't get out
19. Kicked into (whatever)
20. Can't go out
21. Being released (EDIT: i.e., being let go, being freed, being allowed out)
22. Forced out
23. Pulled out
24. Pushed out

"Stay" buttons, re time, space, conditions, things
25. Being there (EDIT: "there" in this case means in a fixed position, and can include "here". It is not intended to mean "not here.")
26. Not being there
27. Want to be there
28. Don't want to be there
29. Can't be there
30. Forced to be there
31. Forced to be elsewhere
32. Prevented from being there (reworded #31, as far as I can see)

Other buttons, re time, space, conditions, things
33. Roll your own

Now, I don't know about you guys, but that third list just about blew me away with hot items from my own life, especially in the SO.

I suppose one could retrofit the boring old Recall Int RD (End of Endless Int Repair RD) and R3X Int RD (Int RD with Engram Running) to include all those extra buttons, but I don't think it's worth the trouble as I think Rog's intention approach superior and it avoids dicking with Hubbard's hallowed words to the faithful.

EDIT: For EP(s) see post #258.

Paul

 

[Dulloldfart]

I hope you are all in close touch with Geir Isene as well? He has a number of people also working on this and a great rational, analytical approach.

I'm not in touch with Geir about it at all. I just do my own thing. Good luck to him, though.

Paul

 

[RogerB]

OK, Paul!

As I've said, you're getting cleverer and cleverer by the moment.

As a note, when I introduced the "be there" item/intention, I meant it in the context of "to be there instead of here."

It ran like a gang buster for me

Also "being here" ran huge charge off.

Sorry if I keep stirring things up folks but it's good to get things complete and correct

Rog

 

[Dulloldfart]

Paul, Hubbard probably got hung up on Int because it's a kind of negative. It's not the going into things that's a problem, it's the "going in too fixedly" aspect of it.

The one sure Correction List item that tells you the action was unnecessary (or that the guy is done on Int/Ext handlings) is "Did you feel fine about going into things in the first place?"

BTW, what's your assessment of the condition now, is it fact or fiction?

Thanks, Panda.

That second item assumes it is only going INTO things that is the problem, and it would appear not to be true.

Fact or fiction? Lots of both!

Paul

 

[Dulloldfart]

OK, Paul!

As I've said, you're getting cleverer and cleverer by the moment.

As a note, when I introduced the "be there" item/intention, I meant it in the context of "to be there instead of here."

It ran like a gang buster for me

Sorry if I keep stirring things up folks but it's good to get things complete and correct

Rog

Fair enough, Rog. But it seemed to me that there are three possible states: going in, going out, not going anywhere. So I took it from there. Your example is a special case of #31/32, I believe. However, I'll change it a bit to add the words "being here" also.

Paul

 

[RogerB]

Fair enough, Rog. But it seemed to me that there are three possible states: going in, going out, not going anywhere. So I took it from there. Your example is a special case of #31/32, I believe.

Paul

That's cool. How ever it is sitting on a person's case, it will trigger for them when they read the line if it is anywhere up to being real for them.

The beauty of the repeater technique is that one's reality and concept of the intention's action changes as one runs it.

R

 

[Panda Termint]

Yes, getting hung up on the negative aspects is a common thread. I don't think Hubbard considered getting out as anything other than a release.

BTW, any "going/getting out" is, of necessity, always proceeded by a consideration that one is in something. That's the rationale behind concentrating in Int rather than Ext. The Ext is ALWAYS later on the chain.

A very hot area, not for the RD but for you to consider if you're looking for highly charged areas, is the concept of being "let out/allowed out" (you'd probably graze it with Being Released). This seems to be a very common feeling, especially if you consider Entity phenomena, having been held or trapped for an interminable time and then "let out".

Got it on the "fact or fiction" question.

 

[Dulloldfart]

Yes, getting hung up on the negative aspects is a common thread. I don't think Hubbard considered getting out as anything other than a release.

But he has other tech that "explains" leaving, blows, namely mu's and the 2nd phenomenon of an overt. If there were yet another huge case factor it would complicate the simplistic (and self-serving) view of only the other two being valid reasons.

BTW, any "going/getting out" is, of necessity, always proceeded by a consideration that one is in something. That's the rationale behind concentrating in Int rather than Ext. The Ext is ALWAYS later on the chain.

I get that. But even in regular Dn & Scn you often have to unburden something by taking later or lesser charge off the topic before you can approach the earlier item. To *dictatorially* chop out Ext is silly.

A very hot area, not for the RD but for you to consider if you're looking for highly charged areas, is the concept of being "let out/allowed out" (you'd probably graze it with Being Released). This seems to be a very common feeling, especially if you consider Entity phenomena, having been held or trapped for an interminable time and then "let out".

Thanks very much. I'll clarify my "being released" as I meant it in that sense of being freed and not the auditing sense of separating from charge or mass. You say "not for the RD" but it seems to fit perfectly.

Paul

 

[Dulloldfart]

It's a rundown (post #250). It needs an EP. Let's see. . . .

Oh, I'll just take the old one, and generalize it up to include the new parameters. Something like, "The EP is that you feel fine about going into, and leaving, and being in locations, times, conditions, and objects (both solid and less so). Also, you feel fine about not going into, not leaving, and not being in locations, times, conditions, and objects (both solid and less so)."

There. That should work fine. The pc will feel blown out enough after some good sessions to feel he can attest to that. It is overstated enough to sound impressive and to cave him in later when he realises he falsely attested and has to buy more auditing. Perfect!

-----

No, I think not. I don't see that it is possible to achieve that EP, as it is an absolute about feeling fine with being in *any* condition, *any* time or place. It's silly. Let's look a bit more responsibly. This RD can be approached in different ways, as far as I can tell. These can be combined, of course, and I may have missed some:

1. Basically to blow any added charge off prior Int RDs that failed to hit the right spots before (as the procedure was too limited) by nailing them this time. If this is the reason one is doing it, then the EP would be something like, "Cleaned up on the subject of past Int handlings." This might be achieved by nothing more than looking over the procedure and the additional buttons listed.

2. To handle a current "Int" problem that is causing various body aches and pains. The EP here would be something like, "No more aches and pains caused by locating or mis-locating self or part(s) of self as a being."

3. To handle a current "Int" problem that is making it difficult to run well with other auditing procedures. The EP here would be something like, "Trouble handled and ready to run non-Int auditing procedures."

4. Then there's the "Extreme sports-type Wheeeee!" crowd who just like to dive into stuff head first and see where it leads and get charge off on odd things. The EP here would be something like, "Has had enough fun at this and nothing obviously left alive and needing handling." Hubbard's idea of thou shalt fully complete any rundown started is great for controlling people and making money, but I don't see that it is needful as long as the pc isn't hung up in the "incomplete action." See — even the name for it is a trap!

None of these EPs necessarily involve flattening the procedure, i.e., the point at which no more relevant intentions can be found. That might occur, but I don't see that it is needful once the required EP has been achieved and the pc isn't hung up in any incomplete cycle. And if the pc later wants to run a bit more, hell, go for it. It's only a problem if you're following Hubbard C/Sing rules where all you are allowed to do is program the pc "up" the Ridge to Total BTdom, or get his attention off off-purpose dev-t shit like his own life and personal goals and purposes and get him back onto the Ridge ASAP if he dares to stray.

Paul

 

[AnonKat]

Placebo effect. Someone believes something is going to help and it does.

Perhaps it's even why auditing worked on some people.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOlteNk0UkI

 

[RogerB]

I LUV it!

But you bloody had me scared there with those first two paragraphs . . . . I thought for moment we hadn't cured you of the "keep them trapped shit!"

Of course a perfect EP would be, "Being happy to be able to be where you are." But that's too much of a Rogerism Kill it . . .

R

It's a rundown (post #250). It needs an EP. Let's see. . . .

Oh, I'll just take the old one, and generalize it up to include the new parameters. Something like, "The EP is that you feel fine about going into, and leaving, and being in locations, times, conditions, and objects (both solid and less so). Also, you feel fine about not going into, not leaving, and not being in locations, times, conditions, and objects (both solid and less so)."

There. That should work fine. The pc will feel blown out enough after some good sessions to feel he can attest to that. It is overstated enough to sound impressive and to cave him in later when he realises he falsely attested and has to buy more auditing. Perfect!

-----

No, I think not. I don't see that it is possible to achieve that EP, as it is an absolute about feeling fine with being in *any* condition, *any* time or place. It's silly. Let's look a bit more responsibly. This RD can be approached in different ways, as far as I can tell. These can be combined, of course, and I may have missed some:

1. Basically to blow any added charge off prior Int RDs that failed to hit the right spots before (as the procedure was too limited) by nailing them this time. If this is the reason one is doing it, then the EP would be something like, "Cleaned up on the subject of past Int handlings." This might be achieved by nothing more than looking over the procedure and the additional buttons listed.

2. To handle a current "Int" problem that is causing various body aches and pains. The EP here would be something like, "No more aches and pains caused by locating or mis-locating self or part(s) of self as a being."

3. To handle a current "Int" problem that is making it difficult to run well with other auditing procedures. The EP here would be something like, "Trouble handled and ready to run non-Int auditing procedures."

4. Then there's the "Extreme sports-type Wheeeee!" crowd who just like to dive into stuff head first and see where it leads and get charge off on odd things. The EP here would be something like, "Has had enough fun at this and nothing obviously left alive and needing handling." Hubbard's idea of thou shalt fully complete any rundown started is great for controlling people and making money, but I don't see that it is needful as long as the pc isn't hung up in the "incomplete action." See — even the name for it is a trap!

None of these EPs necessarily involve flattening the procedure, i.e., the point at which no more relevant intentions can be found. That might occur, but I don't see that it is needful once the required EP has been achieved and the pc isn't hung up in any incomplete cycle. And if the pc later wants to run a bit more, hell, go for it. It's only a problem if you're following Hubbard C/Sing rules where all you are allowed to do is program the pc "up" the Ridge to Total BTdom, or get his attention off off-purpose dev-t shit like his own life and personal goals and purposes and get him back onto the Ridge ASAP if he dares to stray.

Paul