The Little Thread Which Grew - the Apollo '73 to Everything But

[lkwdblds]

Fantastic post!

About that service facsimile thing, I wanted to add a few comments. Why? It's probably some of the most productive and fun auditing you will ever do. Some of the crazy things that come out of the pc's mouth may well have both pc and auditor rolling with laughter. Once you understand what to look for, you can even run this stuff solo to some degree. I say, "to some degree," because it is after all a service fac, perceived to be of some value by the pc, so he might not be all that willing to give it up all by his lonesome.

The level used to be called Habit Release. Do you have some persisting condition or habit that you just can't shake? This could be the answer.

Highlights from HCOB Anatomy of a Service Facsimile

Note that it is a computation, not a doingness, beingness, or havingness.

The pc adopted this because he couldn't stand the confusion in a situation. So he adopted a safe solution. [The safe solution is the service facsimile.]

An idea is the thing most easily substituted for a thetan.

Those things which do not respond to routine auditing, that routine auditing won't change, are rooted in this mechanism. <sarcasm> Better for the GI to develop new rundowns than to find and clear the pc's bag of service facs. </sarcasm>

The service fac is as insidious as it pretends to align with survival. [See AP&A for the exact quote. What that means is some service facs appear perfectly logical. Perfectly logical.]

[When people learn the ser fac is a computation they figure it must be some Boolean if/then equation. This is wrong. Any idea used as a fixed solution is material for a wonderful ser fac.]

The Process

List and Null for the exact computation. Then run the item found in brackets. This is where it gets really screwy as a process. Why?

It is simple, basic auditing that anything the auditor desires the pc to answer must be explicitly stated in the auditing command/question. If you wish to know if birds fly, the question is, "Do birds fly?" The question is not, "Do any of God's creatures fly?"

The first listing question for serfacs is, "In this lifetime, what do you use to make others wrong?" In honest answer to the question, the pc can come up with anything, any Be, Do, Have, fixed idea, whatever. Pc's will do that, and when the listing question F/Ns that's it. The listing is complete per the laws of L&N whether you have found a service fac or not.

The appropriate question, if you are looking for a computation, is, "In this lifetime, what computation do you use to make others wrong?" That question will get you closer to the desired answer without violating basic auditing.

But the ser fac is said to build up mass which will be run off with the bracket process. My question is, "Why go through the mass to find the ser fac? Isn't that the hard way to go about it?" I think so.

We know that the ser fac breeds beingness, doinginess, and havingness. Why not approach it from that angle. Trust me, it's a whole helluva lot easier to go in that way.

So stick with the basic question: "In this lifetime, what do you use to make others wrong?" Just what do you use?

The pc's says anything that answers the question for the pc. "How about (sex, money, power, any emotion, and so on)."

Money is a good one for example. Haven't you ever met a snob who uses money, power, and position to make you or someone you know feel like shit? Have you ever seen someone treat the waitress or hired help like dirt? Some of these types won't even talk to you, they won't even look at you.

So your pc's says, "Money, I have lots of it," because in his mind it's perfectly logical and right. He can't escape the "truth" of what he just said.

"In this lifetime, how does having lots of money make you right?" and now you are off to the waterfall. The pc's is paddling his own canoe, and he's headed for the falls, and there's nothing he can do to stop it because he has lots of money and he's so damn right for it. The others are so damn wrong for not having lots of money, and he's going to prove it to you as he speaks.

Most of the answers are justifications, and you the auditor can follow along with some logic. I mean, it actually makes some sense what the pc is saying. Then there's an answer that just makes no damn sense whatsoever. It might even stop the conversation as the pc pauses to consider what he just said. That's the one you were looking for. That's the service fac. It might not be THE ser fac on the case, but it is a ser fac. Having brought it to view, the compulsion to use it is lessened. There are other listing questions and more opportunity to find the biggie.

ACW added ser fac handling as part of his Clean Slate Drill. The drill is excellent for newbs and old-timers alike. If you think you might have found an area of ser fac, run the brackets, right/wrong, dominate/escape domination, survive/hinder survival of others. If it's not a ser fac no harm done.

Another thing, the auditor asks for, "In this lifetime…" but don't assume the ser fac is of or has been formulated in this lifetime. It is primitive. Chances are the actual serfac was formed before you had a language to articulate it.

Summary:

The serfac is generated by the being not the bank.
It was a safe solution to some confusion.
It continues uninspected.
It doesn't make the pc right, it makes him nuts in the area where the serfac is in use.
Those things that have not surrendered to routine auditing are held in place by this mechanism.
This auditing is a lot of fun. And it is, in my estimation, the most neglected tech, the tech most OUT in the world of Scientology. Hubbard loaded the subject with his own serfacs. People pick them up as locks on their own and dramatize like crazy.
The actual tech of it is available in the Red Vols. My only objection in the bulletins is the sequence in which the ser fac is located and run out.

Fantastic post Ted. Both chock full of good tech and interesting and a fast read as well!

Though I am off the main point with my following comment, I am relating this anecdote because of its humor.

Serfac Anecdote I have a friend MG who I have known since 8th grade. He has never been in or done any courses in Scn. I have never once heard him admit that he was wrong, going back to 1954! One day, in the mid 70's, when I was freshly back from the Apollo, we got into a friendly argument, both of us insisting that we were correct and the other guy was wrong. That evening, I was so sure that I was right and he was in error, that I went to the library and looked up the topic we were arguing about. In an encyclopedia, I found a table with numerical statistics which completely proved my point and copied it.

The next day, I called MG on the phone and told him what I had found which had proved that he was in error. There was a time lag of perhaps 4 seconds where he said nothing and then he blurted out a huge service fac which apparently was very deeply imbedded in his mind.

My non Scio friend's Service Fac
After 4 seconds of communication lag or "dead air", he said to me in a hostile and very annoyed voice, " I SUPPOSE THAT YOU ARE NEVER WRONG!!"

Just think about that!. What a powerful and all encompassing service fact to pull out of one's mind when one is totally proven wrong. THIS SERVICE FAC WILL ALWAYS SAVE THE DAY FOR THE PERSON IN ALL SITUATIONS BUT ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY HAVE IRRIFUTABLY BEEN PROVEN WRONG.
Lakey

 

[RogerB]

Fantastic post Ted. Both chock full of good tech and interesting and a fast read as well!

Snipped . . . . .

My non Scio friend's Service Fac
After 4 seconds of communication lag or "dead air", he said to me in a hostile and very annoyed voice, B]" I SUPPOSE THAT YOU ARE NEVER WRONG!!"[/B]

Just think about that!. What a powerful and all encompassing service fact to pull out of one's mind when one is totally proven wrong. THIS SERVICE FAC WILL ALWAYS SAVE THE DAY FOR THE PERSON IN ALL SITUATIONS BUT ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY HAVE IRRIFUTABLY BEEN PROVEN WRONG.
Lakey

Hell, Lakey, looks like you have found the definitive best way to find every SOB's serfac . . . tell them they are wrong, very wrong, and wait for them to blurt out their self-defensive serfacs!


R

 

[RogerB]

About that service facsimile thing, I wanted to add a few comments. Why? It's probably some of the most productive and fun auditing you will ever do. Some of the crazy things that come out of the pc's mouth may well have both pc and auditor rolling with laughter. Once you understand what to look for, you can even run this stuff solo to some degree. I say, "to some degree," because it is after all a service fac, perceived to be of some value by the pc, so he might not be all that willing to give it up all by his lonesome.

The level used to be called Habit Release. Do you have some persisting condition or habit that you just can't shake? This could be the answer.

Highlights from HCOB Anatomy of a Service Facsimile

Note that it is a computation, not a doingness, beingness, or havingness.

The pc adopted this because he couldn't stand the confusion in a situation. So he adopted a safe solution. [The safe solution is the service facsimile.]

An idea is the thing most easily substituted for a thetan.

Those things which do not respond to routine auditing, that routine auditing won't change, are rooted in this mechanism. <sarcasm> Better for the GI to develop new rundowns than to find and clear the pc's bag of service facs. </sarcasm>

The service fac is as insidious as it pretends to align with survival. [See AP&A for the exact quote. What that means is some service facs appear perfectly logical. Perfectly logical.]

[When people learn the ser fac is a computation they figure it must be some Boolean if/then equation. This is wrong. Any idea used as a fixed solution is material for a wonderful ser fac.]

The Process

List and Null for the exact computation. Then run the item found in brackets. This is where it gets really screwy as a process. Why?

It is simple, basic auditing that anything the auditor desires the pc to answer must be explicitly stated in the auditing command/question. If you wish to know if birds fly, the question is, "Do birds fly?" The question is not, "Do any of God's creatures fly?"

The first listing question for serfacs is, "In this lifetime, what do you use to make others wrong?" In honest answer to the question, the pc can come up with anything, any Be, Do, Have, fixed idea, whatever. Pc's will do that, and when the listing question F/Ns that's it. The listing is complete per the laws of L&N whether you have found a service fac or not.

The appropriate question, if you are looking for a computation, is, "In this lifetime, what computation do you use to make others wrong?" That question will get you closer to the desired answer without violating basic auditing.

But the ser fac is said to build up mass which will be run off with the bracket process. My question is, "Why go through the mass to find the ser fac? Isn't that the hard way to go about it?" I think so.

We know that the ser fac breeds beingness, doinginess, and havingness. Why not approach it from that angle. Trust me, it's a whole helluva lot easier to go in that way.

So stick with the basic question: "In this lifetime, what do you use to make others wrong?" Just what do you use?

The pc's says anything that answers the question for the pc. "How about (sex, money, power, any emotion, and so on)."

Money is a good one for example. Haven't you ever met a snob who uses money, power, and position to make you or someone you know feel like shit? Have you ever seen someone treat the waitress or hired help like dirt? Some of these types won't even talk to you, they won't even look at you.

So your pc's says, "Money, I have lots of it," because in his mind it's perfectly logical and right. He can't escape the "truth" of what he just said.

"In this lifetime, how does having lots of money make you right?" and now you are off to the waterfall. The pc's is paddling his own canoe, and he's headed for the falls, and there's nothing he can do to stop it because he has lots of money and he's so damn right for it. The others are so damn wrong for not having lots of money, and he's going to prove it to you as he speaks.

Most of the answers are justifications, and you the auditor can follow along with some logic. I mean, it actually makes some sense what the pc is saying. Then there's an answer that just makes no damn sense whatsoever. It might even stop the conversation as the pc pauses to consider what he just said. That's the one you were looking for. That's the service fac. It might not be THE ser fac on the case, but it is a ser fac. Having brought it to view, the compulsion to use it is lessened. There are other listing questions and more opportunity to find the biggie.

ACW added ser fac handling as part of his Clean Slate Drill. The drill is excellent for newbs and old-timers alike. If you think you might have found an area of ser fac, run the brackets, right/wrong, dominate/escape domination, survive/hinder survival of others. If it's not a ser fac no harm done.

Another thing, the auditor asks for, "In this lifetime…" but don't assume the ser fac is of or has been formulated in this lifetime. It is primitive. Chances are the actual serfac was formed before you had a language to articulate it.

Summary:

The serfac is generated by the being not the bank.
It was a safe solution to some confusion.
It continues uninspected.
It doesn't make the pc right, it makes him nuts in the area where the serfac is in use.
Those things that have not surrendered to routine auditing are held in place by this mechanism.
This auditing is a lot of fun. And it is, in my estimation, the most neglected tech, the tech most OUT in the world of Scientology. Hubbard loaded the subject with his own serfacs. People pick them up as locks on their own and dramatize like crazy.
The actual tech of it is available in the Red Vols. My only objection in the bulletins is the sequence in which the ser fac is located and run out.

Very nice write-up, Ted.

It really states it all very elegantly. Many pearls of wisdom in the above.

Luvvved the summary at the end.

R

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

About that service facsimile thing, I wanted to add a few comments. Why? It's probably some of the most productive and fun auditing you will ever do. Some of the crazy things that come out of the pc's mouth may well have both pc and auditor rolling with laughter. Once you understand what to look for, you can even run this stuff solo to some degree. I say, "to some degree," because it is after all a service fac, perceived to be of some value by the pc, so he might not be all that willing to give it up all by his lonesome.

The level used to be called Habit Release. Do you have some persisting condition or habit that you just can't shake? This could be the answer.

Highlights from HCOB Anatomy of a Service Facsimile

Note that it is a computation, not a doingness, beingness, or havingness.

The pc adopted this because he couldn't stand the confusion in a situation. So he adopted a safe solution. [The safe solution is the service facsimile.]

An idea is the thing most easily substituted for a thetan.

Those things which do not respond to routine auditing, that routine auditing won't change, are rooted in this mechanism. <sarcasm> Better for the GI to develop new rundowns than to find and clear the pc's bag of service facs. </sarcasm>

The service fac is as insidious as it pretends to align with survival. [See AP&A for the exact quote. What that means is some service facs appear perfectly logical. Perfectly logical.]

[When people learn the ser fac is a computation they figure it must be some Boolean if/then equation. This is wrong. Any idea used as a fixed solution is material for a wonderful ser fac.]

The Process

List and Null for the exact computation. Then run the item found in brackets. This is where it gets really screwy as a process. Why?

It is simple, basic auditing that anything the auditor desires the pc to answer must be explicitly stated in the auditing command/question. If you wish to know if birds fly, the question is, "Do birds fly?" The question is not, "Do any of God's creatures fly?"

The first listing question for serfacs is, "In this lifetime, what do you use to make others wrong?" In honest answer to the question, the pc can come up with anything, any Be, Do, Have, fixed idea, whatever. Pc's will do that, and when the listing question F/Ns that's it. The listing is complete per the laws of L&N whether you have found a service fac or not.

The appropriate question, if you are looking for a computation, is, "In this lifetime, what computation do you use to make others wrong?" That question will get you closer to the desired answer without violating basic auditing.

But the ser fac is said to build up mass which will be run off with the bracket process. My question is, "Why go through the mass to find the ser fac? Isn't that the hard way to go about it?" I think so.

We know that the ser fac breeds beingness, doinginess, and havingness. Why not approach it from that angle. Trust me, it's a whole helluva lot easier to go in that way.

So stick with the basic question: "In this lifetime, what do you use to make others wrong?" Just what do you use?

The pc's says anything that answers the question for the pc. "How about (sex, money, power, any emotion, and so on)."

Money is a good one for example. Haven't you ever met a snob who uses money, power, and position to make you or someone you know feel like shit? Have you ever seen someone treat the waitress or hired help like dirt? Some of these types won't even talk to you, they won't even look at you.

So your pc's says, "Money, I have lots of it," because in his mind it's perfectly logical and right. He can't escape the "truth" of what he just said.

"In this lifetime, how does having lots of money make you right?" and now you are off to the waterfall. The pc's is paddling his own canoe, and he's headed for the falls, and there's nothing he can do to stop it because he has lots of money and he's so damn right for it. The others are so damn wrong for not having lots of money, and he's going to prove it to you as he speaks.

Most of the answers are justifications, and you the auditor can follow along with some logic. I mean, it actually makes some sense what the pc is saying. Then there's an answer that just makes no damn sense whatsoever. It might even stop the conversation as the pc pauses to consider what he just said. That's the one you were looking for. That's the service fac. It might not be THE ser fac on the case, but it is a ser fac. Having brought it to view, the compulsion to use it is lessened. There are other listing questions and more opportunity to find the biggie.

ACW added ser fac handling as part of his Clean Slate Drill. The drill is excellent for newbs and old-timers alike. If you think you might have found an area of ser fac, run the brackets, right/wrong, dominate/escape domination, survive/hinder survival of others. If it's not a ser fac no harm done.

Another thing, the auditor asks for, "In this lifetime…" but don't assume the ser fac is of or has been formulated in this lifetime. It is primitive. Chances are the actual serfac was formed before you had a language to articulate it.

Summary:

The serfac is generated by the being not the bank.
It was a safe solution to some confusion.
It continues uninspected.
It doesn't make the pc right, it makes him nuts in the area where the serfac is in use.
Those things that have not surrendered to routine auditing are held in place by this mechanism.
This auditing is a lot of fun. And it is, in my estimation, the most neglected tech, the tech most OUT in the world of Scientology. Hubbard loaded the subject with his own serfacs. People pick them up as locks on their own and dramatize like crazy.
The actual tech of it is available in the Red Vols. My only objection in the bulletins is the sequence in which the ser fac is located and run out.

Another Zinger from the Tedster.

Damn, is it me or have all y'all noticed that there's been some sure enough great stuff going up on ESMB lately?

Face

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

And a fair share of that "stuff" has been coming from Hats ...I just don't seem to get around to tellin' her that much...she's a night owl and I'm and early bird.

Face

 

[Ted]

And a fair share of that "stuff" has been coming from Hats ...I just don't seem to get around to tellin' her that much...she's a night owl and I'm and early bird.

Face

Hats' comments on the ser fac were right on target and that prompted my recent post on same. It's one of my favorite subjects.

Way to go Hats!

 

[Ted]

Some people wonder, "How the heck did a fairly intelligent person such as yourself get caught up in Scientology?" The answer can be made simple or complex. Here's the simple answer: There was a time when it was a whole lot of fun.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybdSzN2vr4w

 

[lkwdblds]

Hell, Lakey, looks like you have found the definitive best way to find every SOB's serfac . . . tell them they are wrong, very wrong, and wait for them to blurt out their self-defensive serfacs!


R

What I did may not be "Phi Beta Kappa" behavior. However, I did not tell the other guy that he was very wrong. He and I were having a spirited debate, both trying to prove our point to the best of our abilities. After the debate ended in a stalemate, I did further research and found printed evidence in an encyclopedia to support my position. I was eager to make this known to him which I did.

By doing that, I found his Service Fac. It was probably an unusual occurance. It might be hard to make this into a process or some definitive method of finding a service Fac.

Maybe there is some long term Service Fac finding tech which could be developed here.

A process could be devised as follows:

COMMAND: "If you were sure your were right and someone proved you wrong, what would you say to him?"

I am doing this tongue in cheek but it seems that if a person actually ran this on another, some actual service facs could conceivably be brought out. Do you tech mavens have any comment on what might happen if this process were actually run on a properly set up person or just run in general.
Lakey

 

[Ted]

What I did may not be "Phi Beta Kappa" behavior. However, I did not tell the other guy that he was very wrong. He and I were having a spirited debate, both trying to prove our point to the best of our abilities. After the debate ended in a stalemate, I did further research and found printed evidence in an encyclopedia to support my position. I was eager to make this known to him which I did.

By doing that, I found his Service Fac. It was probably an unusual occurance. It might be hard to make this into a process or some definitive method of finding a service Fac.

Maybe there is some long term Service Fac finding tech which could be developed here.

A process could be devised as follows:

COMMAND: "If you were sure your were right and someone proved you wrong, what would you say to him?"

I am doing this tongue in cheek but it seems that if a person actually ran this on another, some actual service facs could conceivably be brought out. Do you tech mavens have any comment on what might happen if this process were actually run on a properly set up person or just run in general.
Lakey

You can help the pc find his serfac with the recommended processes. You will NEVER be able to look at someone and say what his serfac is. Just never. It isn't going to happen.

That's not to say you won't be able to tell when you are being hit with one, you certainly will be aware of that. But your guess as to what it might be will take you closer to your own serfacs than to the other person's.

 

[Jachs]

Some people wonder, "How the heck did a fairly intelligent person such as yourself get caught up in Scientology?" The answer can be made simple or complex. Here's the simple answer: There was a time when it was a whole lot of fun.

Thats Classic, thanks Ted. So true.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

About that service facsimile thing, I wanted to add a few comments. Why? It's probably some of the most productive and fun auditing you will ever do. Some of the crazy things that come out of the pc's mouth may well have both pc and auditor rolling with laughter. Once you understand what to look for, you can even run this stuff solo to some degree. I say, "to some degree," because it is after all a service fac, perceived to be of some value by the pc, so he might not be all that willing to give it up all by his lonesome.

The level used to be called Habit Release. Do you have some persisting condition or habit that you just can't shake? This could be the answer.

Highlights from HCOB Anatomy of a Service Facsimile

Note that it is a computation, not a doingness, beingness, or havingness.

The pc adopted this because he couldn't stand the confusion in a situation. So he adopted a safe solution. [The safe solution is the service facsimile.]

An idea is the thing most easily substituted for a thetan.

Those things which do not respond to routine auditing, that routine auditing won't change, are rooted in this mechanism. <sarcasm> Better for the GI to develop new rundowns than to find and clear the pc's bag of service facs. </sarcasm>

The service fac is as insidious as it pretends to align with survival. [See AP&A for the exact quote. What that means is some service facs appear perfectly logical. Perfectly logical.]

[When people learn the ser fac is a computation they figure it must be some Boolean if/then equation. This is wrong. Any idea used as a fixed solution is material for a wonderful ser fac.]

The Process

List and Null for the exact computation. Then run the item found in brackets. This is where it gets really screwy as a process. Why?

It is simple, basic auditing that anything the auditor desires the pc to answer must be explicitly stated in the auditing command/question. If you wish to know if birds fly, the question is, "Do birds fly?" The question is not, "Do any of God's creatures fly?"

The first listing question for serfacs is, "In this lifetime, what do you use to make others wrong?" In honest answer to the question, the pc can come up with anything, any Be, Do, Have, fixed idea, whatever. Pc's will do that, and when the listing question F/Ns that's it. The listing is complete per the laws of L&N whether you have found a service fac or not.

The appropriate question, if you are looking for a computation, is, "In this lifetime, what computation do you use to make others wrong?" That question will get you closer to the desired answer without violating basic auditing.

But the ser fac is said to build up mass which will be run off with the bracket process. My question is, "Why go through the mass to find the ser fac? Isn't that the hard way to go about it?" I think so.

We know that the ser fac breeds beingness, doinginess, and havingness. Why not approach it from that angle. Trust me, it's a whole helluva lot easier to go in that way.

So stick with the basic question: "In this lifetime, what do you use to make others wrong?" Just what do you use?

The pc's says anything that answers the question for the pc. "How about (sex, money, power, any emotion, and so on)."

Money is a good one for example. Haven't you ever met a snob who uses money, power, and position to make you or someone you know feel like shit? Have you ever seen someone treat the waitress or hired help like dirt? Some of these types won't even talk to you, they won't even look at you.

So your pc's says, "Money, I have lots of it," because in his mind it's perfectly logical and right. He can't escape the "truth" of what he just said.

"In this lifetime, how does having lots of money make you right?" and now you are off to the waterfall. The pc's is paddling his own canoe, and he's headed for the falls, and there's nothing he can do to stop it because he has lots of money and he's so damn right for it. The others are so damn wrong for not having lots of money, and he's going to prove it to you as he speaks.

Most of the answers are justifications, and you the auditor can follow along with some logic. I mean, it actually makes some sense what the pc is saying. Then there's an answer that just makes no damn sense whatsoever. It might even stop the conversation as the pc pauses to consider what he just said. That's the one you were looking for. That's the service fac. It might not be THE ser fac on the case, but it is a ser fac. Having brought it to view, the compulsion to use it is lessened. There are other listing questions and more opportunity to find the biggie.

ACW added ser fac handling as part of his Clean Slate Drill. The drill is excellent for newbs and old-timers alike. If you think you might have found an area of ser fac, run the brackets, right/wrong, dominate/escape domination, survive/hinder survival of others. If it's not a ser fac no harm done.

Another thing, the auditor asks for, "In this lifetime…" but don't assume the ser fac is of or has been formulated in this lifetime. It is primitive. Chances are the actual serfac was formed before you had a language to articulate it.

Summary:

The serfac is generated by the being not the bank.
It was a safe solution to some confusion.
It continues uninspected.
It doesn't make the pc right, it makes him nuts in the area where the serfac is in use.
Those things that have not surrendered to routine auditing are held in place by this mechanism.
This auditing is a lot of fun. And it is, in my estimation, the most neglected tech, the tech most OUT in the world of Scientology. Hubbard loaded the subject with his own serfacs. People pick them up as locks on their own and dramatize like crazy.
The actual tech of it is available in the Red Vols. My only objection in the bulletins is the sequence in which the ser fac is located and run out.

Good on ya, Ted!

And special kudos for ....

... Hubbard loaded the subject with his own serfacs. ...

Mark A. Baker

 

[Mark A. Baker]

... But your guess as to what it might be will take you closer to your own serfacs than to the other person's.

I've used this to help spot some of my own serfacs; i.e. what is the other guy doing that makes him 'wrong'?

Since the world we 'perceive' is filtered through our own considerations, the projections made of 'right' & 'wrong' often provide insight into unquestioned aspects of our own state of mind. I've always found that anyone I find 'utterly intolerable' appears to be acting out qualities I find most objectionable in myself.


Mark A. Baker

 

[FoTi]

About that service facsimile thing, I wanted to add a few comments. Why? It's probably some of the most productive and fun auditing you will ever do. Some of the crazy things that come out of the pc's mouth may well have both pc and auditor rolling with laughter. Once you understand what to look for, you can even run this stuff solo to some degree. I say, "to some degree," because it is after all a service fac, perceived to be of some value by the pc, so he might not be all that willing to give it up all by his lonesome.

The level used to be called Habit Release. Do you have some persisting condition or habit that you just can't shake? This could be the answer.

Highlights from HCOB Anatomy of a Service Facsimile

Note that it is a computation, not a doingness, beingness, or havingness.

The pc adopted this because he couldn't stand the confusion in a situation. So he adopted a safe solution. [The safe solution is the service facsimile.]

An idea is the thing most easily substituted for a thetan.

Those things which do not respond to routine auditing, that routine auditing won't change, are rooted in this mechanism. <sarcasm> Better for the GI to develop new rundowns than to find and clear the pc's bag of service facs. </sarcasm>

The service fac is as insidious as it pretends to align with survival. [See AP&A for the exact quote. What that means is some service facs appear perfectly logical. Perfectly logical.]

[When people learn the ser fac is a computation they figure it must be some Boolean if/then equation. This is wrong. Any idea used as a fixed solution is material for a wonderful ser fac.]

The Process

List and Null for the exact computation. Then run the item found in brackets. This is where it gets really screwy as a process. Why?

It is simple, basic auditing that anything the auditor desires the pc to answer must be explicitly stated in the auditing command/question. If you wish to know if birds fly, the question is, "Do birds fly?" The question is not, "Do any of God's creatures fly?"

The first listing question for serfacs is, "In this lifetime, what do you use to make others wrong?" In honest answer to the question, the pc can come up with anything, any Be, Do, Have, fixed idea, whatever. Pc's will do that, and when the listing question F/Ns that's it. The listing is complete per the laws of L&N whether you have found a service fac or not.

The appropriate question, if you are looking for a computation, is, "In this lifetime, what computation do you use to make others wrong?" That question will get you closer to the desired answer without violating basic auditing.

But the ser fac is said to build up mass which will be run off with the bracket process. My question is, "Why go through the mass to find the ser fac? Isn't that the hard way to go about it?" I think so.

We know that the ser fac breeds beingness, doinginess, and havingness. Why not approach it from that angle. Trust me, it's a whole helluva lot easier to go in that way.

So stick with the basic question: "In this lifetime, what do you use to make others wrong?" Just what do you use?

The pc's says anything that answers the question for the pc. "How about (sex, money, power, any emotion, and so on)."

Money is a good one for example. Haven't you ever met a snob who uses money, power, and position to make you or someone you know feel like shit? Have you ever seen someone treat the waitress or hired help like dirt? Some of these types won't even talk to you, they won't even look at you.

So your pc's says, "Money, I have lots of it," because in his mind it's perfectly logical and right. He can't escape the "truth" of what he just said.

"In this lifetime, how does having lots of money make you right?" and now you are off to the waterfall. The pc's is paddling his own canoe, and he's headed for the falls, and there's nothing he can do to stop it because he has lots of money and he's so damn right for it. The others are so damn wrong for not having lots of money, and he's going to prove it to you as he speaks.

Most of the answers are justifications, and you the auditor can follow along with some logic. I mean, it actually makes some sense what the pc is saying. Then there's an answer that just makes no damn sense whatsoever. It might even stop the conversation as the pc pauses to consider what he just said. That's the one you were looking for. That's the service fac. It might not be THE ser fac on the case, but it is a ser fac. Having brought it to view, the compulsion to use it is lessened. There are other listing questions and more opportunity to find the biggie.

ACW added ser fac handling as part of his Clean Slate Drill. The drill is excellent for newbs and old-timers alike. If you think you might have found an area of ser fac, run the brackets, right/wrong, dominate/escape domination, survive/hinder survival of others. If it's not a ser fac no harm done.

Another thing, the auditor asks for, "In this lifetime…" but don't assume the ser fac is of or has been formulated in this lifetime. It is primitive. Chances are the actual serfac was formed before you had a language to articulate it.

Summary:

The serfac is generated by the being not the bank.
It was a safe solution to some confusion.
It continues uninspected.
It doesn't make the pc right, it makes him nuts in the area where the serfac is in use.
Those things that have not surrendered to routine auditing are held in place by this mechanism.
This auditing is a lot of fun. And it is, in my estimation, the most neglected tech, the tech most OUT in the world of Scientology. Hubbard loaded the subject with his own serfacs. People pick them up as locks on their own and dramatize like crazy.
The actual tech of it is available in the Red Vols. My only objection in the bulletins is the sequence in which the ser fac is located and run out.

Wow, Ted. Thanks for this.

 

[FoTi]

Hell, Lakey, looks like you have found the definitive best way to find every SOB's serfac . . . tell them they are wrong, very wrong, and wait for them to blurt out their self-defensive serfacs!


R

 

[Mark A. Baker]

Hellen Chen Academy

I had the honor of attending a celebration at Helmut & Hellen Flasch's home yesterday. The occasion was a combination graduation ceremony for students at the Hellen Chen Academy as well as a celebration of the Flasch's having left the church one year ago. They've had a busy year.

In brief they have trained several class iv auditors since my last visit back in the Fall. Also, they had several of their pcs go clear on auditing. On some of these cycles they received assistance from Trey Lotz, one of the prominent & highly regarded freezone auditors in the greater LA area.

I genuinely believe the Hellen Chen Academy is outproducing the major Co$ orgs in the area. One of the students commented that the only thing they had lost as a result of leaving the church was the suppression and they were all expanding rapidly as a result. It was heartwarming to see such an eager & happy bunch of young scientologists using what they know to actively help others. As I have said on another occasion, it was highly reminiscent for me of the old days of the mission network. The days when people like Pam & Ray Kemp, Alan Walter, Kingsley Wimbush, et al, established and managed scientology field centers which thrived by ensuring that scientology was FUN and people had and retained WINS.

Hellen in particular has made it her mission to help these young people develop 'life skills'. Since many of the students are chinese, they are taught english. Not only how to read the language for study purposes, but also writing & public speaking. It's quite inspiring to listen to these young people, many who never spoke a word of english a few months back, speaking on their wins on course & in session. Additionally, she requires them all to learn cooking and domestic skills during the course of their training, so as to prepare them for the lives they face. They develop a great esprit de corps working together. And the food is pretty d@mn tasty too!

In addition to everything else she & Helmut have on their plate with the expansion of the organizations both in LA and overseas, Hellen has been busy writing a book and making a documentary film on the subject of the book, marriage.

The party included quite a number of invited guests from around the region. Some were ol' timers. Some only recently left the church. All in all it was an excellent & highly enjoyable mingle. Kudos to the whole team there.


Mark A. Baker

 

[FoTi]

I had the honor of attending a celebration at Helmut & Hellen Flasch's home yesterday. The occasion was a combination graduation ceremony for students at the Hellen Chen Academy as well as a celebration of the Flasch's having left the church one year ago. They've had a busy year.

In brief they have trained several class iv auditors since my last visit back in the Fall. Also, they had several of their pcs go clear on auditing. On some of these cycles they received assistance from Trey Lotz, one of the prominent & highly regarded freezone auditors in the greater LA area.

I genuinely believe the Hellen Chen Academy is outproducing the major Co$ orgs in the area. One of the students commented that the only thing they had lost as a result of leaving the church was the suppression and they were all expanding rapidly as a result. It was heartwarming to see such an eager & happy bunch of young scientologists using what they know to actively help others. As I have said on another occasion, it was highly reminiscent for me of the old days of the mission network. The days when people like Pam & Ray Kemp, Alan Walter, Kingsley Wimbush, et al, established and managed scientology field centers which thrived by ensuring that scientology was FUN and people had and retained WINS.

Hellen in particular has made it her mission to help these young people develop 'life skills'. Since many of the students are chinese, they are taught english. Not only how to read the language for study purposes, but also writing & public speaking. It's quite inspiring to listen to these young people, many who never spoke a word of english a few months back, speaking on their wins on course & in session. Additionally, she requires them all to learn cooking and domestic skills during the course of their training, so as to prepare them for the lives they face. They develop a great esprit de corps working together. And the food is pretty d@mn tasty too!

In addition to everything else she & Helmut have on their plate with the expansion of the organizations both in LA and overseas, Hellen has been busy writing a book and making a documentary film on the subject of the book, marriage.

The party included quite a number of invited guests from around the region. Some were ol' timers. Some only recently left the church. All in all it was an excellent & highly enjoyable mingle. Kudos to the whole team there.


Mark A. Baker

Nice.

 

[Terril park]

You can help the pc find his serfac with the recommended processes. You will NEVER be able to look at someone and say what his serfac is. Just never. It isn't going to happen.

Thats an absolute. You into such?

Also you are indirectly saying one needs to use the tech.

 

[Jachs]

I had the honor of attending a celebration at Helmut & Hellen Flasch's home yesterday. The occasion was a combination graduation ceremony for students at the Hellen Chen Academy as well as a celebration of the Flasch's having left the church one year ago. They've had a busy year.

In brief they have trained several class iv auditors since my last visit back in the Fall. Also, they had several of their pcs go clear on auditing. On some of these cycles they received assistance from Trey Lotz, one of the prominent & highly regarded freezone auditors in the greater LA area.

I genuinely believe the Hellen Chen Academy is outproducing the major Co$ orgs in the area. One of the students commented that the only thing they had lost as a result of leaving the church was the suppression and they were all expanding rapidly as a result. It was heartwarming to see such an eager & happy bunch of young scientologists using what they know to actively help others. As I have said on another occasion, it was highly reminiscent for me of the old days of the mission network. The days when people like Pam & Ray Kemp, Alan Walter, Kingsley Wimbush, et al, established and managed scientology field centers which thrived by ensuring that scientology was FUN and people had and retained WINS.

Hellen in particular has made it her mission to help these young people develop 'life skills'. Since many of the students are chinese, they are taught english. Not only how to read the language for study purposes, but also writing & public speaking. It's quite inspiring to listen to these young people, many who never spoke a word of english a few months back, speaking on their wins on course & in session. Additionally, she requires them all to learn cooking and domestic skills during the course of their training, so as to prepare them for the lives they face. They develop a great esprit de corps working together. And the food is pretty d@mn tasty too!

In addition to everything else she & Helmut have on their plate with the expansion of the organizations both in LA and overseas, Hellen has been busy writing a book and making a documentary film on the subject of the book, marriage.

The party included quite a number of invited guests from around the region. Some were ol' timers. Some only recently left the church. All in all it was an excellent & highly enjoyable mingle. Kudos to the whole team there.


Mark A. Baker

Good news Mark. i can hear OSA squirming in their seats , thats the idiocy of it all.

 

[lkwdblds]

Candy and I attended on our way back from Cupertino!

I had the honor of attending a celebration at Helmut & Hellen Flasch's home yesterday. The occasion was a combination graduation ceremony for students at the Hellen Chen Academy as well as a celebration of the Flasch's having left the church one year ago. They've had a busy year.

In brief they have trained several class iv auditors since my last visit back in the Fall. Also, they had several of their pcs go clear on auditing. On some of these cycles they received assistance from Trey Lotz, one of the prominent & highly regarded freezone auditors in the greater LA area.

I genuinely believe the Hellen Chen Academy is outproducing the major Co$ orgs in the area. One of the students commented that the only thing they had lost as a result of leaving the church was the suppression and they were all expanding rapidly as a result. It was heartwarming to see such an eager & happy bunch of young scientologists using what they know to actively help others. As I have said on another occasion, it was highly reminiscent for me of the old days of the mission network. The days when people like Pam & Ray Kemp, Alan Walter, Kingsley Wimbush, et al, established and managed scientology field centers which thrived by ensuring that scientology was FUN and people had and retained WINS.

Hellen in particular has made it her mission to help these young people develop 'life skills'. Since many of the students are chinese, they are taught english. Not only how to read the language for study purposes, but also writing & public speaking. It's quite inspiring to listen to these young people, many who never spoke a word of english a few months back, speaking on their wins on course & in session. Additionally, she requires them all to learn cooking and domestic skills during the course of their training, so as to prepare them for the lives they face. They develop a great esprit de corps working together. And the food is pretty d@mn tasty too!

In addition to everything else she & Helmut have on their plate with the expansion of the organizations both in LA and overseas, Hellen has been busy writing a book and making a documentary film on the subject of the book, marriage.

The party included quite a number of invited guests from around the region. Some were ol' timers. Some only recently left the church. All in all it was an excellent & highly enjoyable mingle. Kudos to the whole team there.


Mark A. Baker

Thanks for the fine description Mark. Candy was invited as well and brought me as her guest. We stopped there on our way back from Cupertino. Some of the other guests were Aida, her Husband and her Daughter and also a well known Class XII auditor. The Chen Academy's 3rd dynamic group is really a pleasure to see in action. Young talented teen age students from Taiwan being very happy and very productive at the same time. It was really a joy to be in attendance at this party and Graduation Ceremony.
Lakey

 

[Mark A. Baker]

... Some of the other guests were Aida, her Husband Dave and her Daughter and also Class XII, Karen De la Carre (spelling). ...

Out of curiosity Gary, did you actually ask these people if they wanted their names mentioned in this context on the internet, or did you just barge in and do it?

You should never assume that personal information is 'okay to print' simply based on your knowledge of their maintaining an internet or other public presence. Many people prefer to keep their personal actions & associations private revealing only what THEY intend to reveal about themselves on public fora.


Mark A. Baker