FoTi
Crusader
Are U.S. citizens allowed to work in Mexico?
The Little Thread Which Grew - the Apollo '73 to Everything But
- Thread starter lkwdblds
- Start date
- Status
Are U.S. citizens allowed to work in Mexico?
CarmeloOrchards
Crusader
there is no doubt a special foreign visa that you would need in order to work for Mexicans. If you are working for clients in the US, it would be different. Mexico is looking to bring money into their country.
FoTi
Crusader
I'm a massage therapist....I wonder if I would be allowed to get a practice going there?
How does one go about finding out about such things?
CarmeloOrchards
Crusader
CarmeloOrchards
Crusader
My mom used to wear Chanel No 5 and she smelled so-o-o-o good. I liked it so much on her that I tried to wear it many times and it always smelled not good on me... different body chemistry? :confused2:
must be
FoTi
Crusader
Thanks.
CarmeloOrchards
Crusader
Speaking of old guys
Official: Chuck Berry felt ill before Chicago show
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdhOAHs2TlU&feature=related
The Associated Press
Posted: 01/01/2011 10:28:17 PM PST
Updated: 01/01/2011 10:58:22 PM PST
CHICAGO—A Chicago fire official says 84-year-old rock-and-roll legend Chuck Berry felt ill and was checked out by ambulance medics before a show Saturday night. An audience member at the show, however, said Berry slumped over during the show and was offstage for at least 20 minutes.
Fire Department spokesman Joe Roccasalva said Berry felt better and signed a release. Roccasalva said the confusion arose because emergency personnel later responded to a patron at the show who was unwell.
Concertgoer Steve Handwerker said Berry fell face-first over the keyboard and was helped offstage, though he later returned.
Berry is known for his classic songs including "Maybelline" and "Johnny B. Goode."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MLBfwblps8
His agent Dick Alen said he had no information on the matter.
Official: Chuck Berry felt ill before Chicago show
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdhOAHs2TlU&feature=related
The Associated Press
Posted: 01/01/2011 10:28:17 PM PST
Updated: 01/01/2011 10:58:22 PM PST
CHICAGO—A Chicago fire official says 84-year-old rock-and-roll legend Chuck Berry felt ill and was checked out by ambulance medics before a show Saturday night. An audience member at the show, however, said Berry slumped over during the show and was offstage for at least 20 minutes.
Fire Department spokesman Joe Roccasalva said Berry felt better and signed a release. Roccasalva said the confusion arose because emergency personnel later responded to a patron at the show who was unwell.
Concertgoer Steve Handwerker said Berry fell face-first over the keyboard and was helped offstage, though he later returned.
Berry is known for his classic songs including "Maybelline" and "Johnny B. Goode."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MLBfwblps8
His agent Dick Alen said he had no information on the matter.
CarmeloOrchards
Crusader
a blast from the past (only one year ago)
This is a top ten "best of" post from this thread:
Originally Posted by RogerB
I got a PM suggesting I should stick my nose in on this
I was away on business last week for several days, and got way behind in my reading
So here are a few quick comments.
On TR0 versus Presence:
I was going to get into this on the thread I started under the title "Screwy Tech."
TR0 is named "Confronting," which is unfortunate; that and the fact that the instructions tell you the following:
You clever folks can check out the rest of the instructions as covered in the "TRAINING STRESS." Clearly written in the instruction is to "be three feet in front of the preclear."
If one goes to a dictionary for the definition of "confront" we find it is not a very friendly way to relate to people Check it out!
Also note that "CONFRONT" is at 2.0 on the "Reality Scale" which is also the level of Antagonism!
So, the whole basis of TR0, Confronting, as trained and practiced is that of drilling the student to be separate to, opposite, and to "confront" using nothing else but auditing and the ability to be "there" (three feet in front of the PC) and confront.
This at a minimum breeds and reinforces separateness and fixes the student in and at a low mood level relationship.
Compare this to ACW "Presence Process."
Firstly, one defines and obtains a clear understanding of what presence means and is. In essence, it is defined (in the materials as well as in dictionaries) as meaning being here, now. Though there are some other wonderful meaning of the word that also apply.
So, having defined what the word presence means, the student is simply asked/told to "Be here."
This opens up a whole panoply of expansion and mood up-lifting opportunities.
Rather than staying separate and at a rather low mood, the student can rise to his optimum in emotional relationship and also up to being at one with the coach. This, of course, is the ultimate of "presence, here, now" and of a loving relationship in which one can fully and perfectly duplicate the emanations/communications of another
It is a process that can and does restore to the individual the ultimate of his power of presence and volition in that respect. That is, the ability to choose to be present with at the level optimum for any circumstance.
On the issue of having been stuck with connections or relationships (as was mentioned in the context of taking too long to leave or having not been able to leave due to considered allegiance) . . . this little tech point might help.
Recall your original postulate/decision to join and the reasons why you considered it was "survival" to do so. Blow/erase that consideration, (and the consequences of the decision might also need to be addressed) and the whole thing will evaporate.
AS to "the Ranch," well Alan had always said that the best way to learn (auditing) was to have the guy or gal do some of it, some very easy, basic foolproof stuff; and then to give some of the explanation/theory of what it was all about. That way the student had something to relate the theory to.
And the processes used as the clients first actions at the ranch are so simple, and marvelously effective, that wins all around are routine.
Indeed, one of my favorite actions when working with former Scn trained (TR'ed to death) auditors is to take them through the exercise above vis a vis the nonsense of TR0 and why it has screwed people up.
Once they understand the notion that totally, wholly, fully being present with another would/could be being at one with them at where they are, I give them the command: "As a spiritual Being, be present."
Note that "as a spiritual Being" touch.
Try it
There is a guy on this board for whom I ran that command at the ranch with the result of his "zorch" being blown
And with this handling I have totally salvaged the cases of former Scio folks that were screwed up. One guy went exterior and totally, wholly present during TR0 . . . that was the bad news . . . the church turned that into a problem, telling him he couldn't do anything more of processing or training until he had an "out-int" handling for $x$x$x$xxx, which in his younger years he did not have. That was the end of his Scn career Talk about dull stupid tech!!!
At the ranch we would have ack'ed the huge win and done the "Celebration of Wins Handling" . . . (I mentioned this R/D at the end of my FZ presentation in Pasadena) . . . so as to put the regained ability under the full knowing control of the guy!
That's it for now . . . I'm off to handle other traffic
RogerB
This is a top ten "best of" post from this thread:
Originally Posted by RogerB
I got a PM suggesting I should stick my nose in on this
I was away on business last week for several days, and got way behind in my reading
So here are a few quick comments.
On TR0 versus Presence:
I was going to get into this on the thread I started under the title "Screwy Tech."
TR0 is named "Confronting," which is unfortunate; that and the fact that the instructions tell you the following:
You clever folks can check out the rest of the instructions as covered in the "TRAINING STRESS." Clearly written in the instruction is to "be three feet in front of the preclear."
If one goes to a dictionary for the definition of "confront" we find it is not a very friendly way to relate to people Check it out!
Also note that "CONFRONT" is at 2.0 on the "Reality Scale" which is also the level of Antagonism!
So, the whole basis of TR0, Confronting, as trained and practiced is that of drilling the student to be separate to, opposite, and to "confront" using nothing else but auditing and the ability to be "there" (three feet in front of the PC) and confront.
This at a minimum breeds and reinforces separateness and fixes the student in and at a low mood level relationship.
Compare this to ACW "Presence Process."
Firstly, one defines and obtains a clear understanding of what presence means and is. In essence, it is defined (in the materials as well as in dictionaries) as meaning being here, now. Though there are some other wonderful meaning of the word that also apply.
So, having defined what the word presence means, the student is simply asked/told to "Be here."
This opens up a whole panoply of expansion and mood up-lifting opportunities.
Rather than staying separate and at a rather low mood, the student can rise to his optimum in emotional relationship and also up to being at one with the coach. This, of course, is the ultimate of "presence, here, now" and of a loving relationship in which one can fully and perfectly duplicate the emanations/communications of another
It is a process that can and does restore to the individual the ultimate of his power of presence and volition in that respect. That is, the ability to choose to be present with at the level optimum for any circumstance.
On the issue of having been stuck with connections or relationships (as was mentioned in the context of taking too long to leave or having not been able to leave due to considered allegiance) . . . this little tech point might help.
Recall your original postulate/decision to join and the reasons why you considered it was "survival" to do so. Blow/erase that consideration, (and the consequences of the decision might also need to be addressed) and the whole thing will evaporate.
AS to "the Ranch," well Alan had always said that the best way to learn (auditing) was to have the guy or gal do some of it, some very easy, basic foolproof stuff; and then to give some of the explanation/theory of what it was all about. That way the student had something to relate the theory to.
And the processes used as the clients first actions at the ranch are so simple, and marvelously effective, that wins all around are routine.
Indeed, one of my favorite actions when working with former Scn trained (TR'ed to death) auditors is to take them through the exercise above vis a vis the nonsense of TR0 and why it has screwed people up.
Once they understand the notion that totally, wholly, fully being present with another would/could be being at one with them at where they are, I give them the command: "As a spiritual Being, be present."
Note that "as a spiritual Being" touch.
Try it
There is a guy on this board for whom I ran that command at the ranch with the result of his "zorch" being blown
And with this handling I have totally salvaged the cases of former Scio folks that were screwed up. One guy went exterior and totally, wholly present during TR0 . . . that was the bad news . . . the church turned that into a problem, telling him he couldn't do anything more of processing or training until he had an "out-int" handling for $x$x$x$xxx, which in his younger years he did not have. That was the end of his Scn career Talk about dull stupid tech!!!
At the ranch we would have ack'ed the huge win and done the "Celebration of Wins Handling" . . . (I mentioned this R/D at the end of my FZ presentation in Pasadena) . . . so as to put the regained ability under the full knowing control of the guy!
That's it for now . . . I'm off to handle other traffic
RogerB
Ted
Gold Meritorious Patron
Confronting?
1) Good post, Roger.
Not to be pedantic here but Confront is not referenced on the Reality Scale.
On the scale called Reality-Spotting by E-Meter, perhaps my favorite of all the scales, Confront is positioned with 1.5, anger, Solid Terminals, and the meter characteristic is a drop (or fall).
2) As a drill TR-0 is fine. I say that because there are many students who will need to come UP to confront before they can rise to greater heights. The entire subject of auditing is about methods to help the pc/client rise in tone, a permanent rise in tone perceived to be the ultimate expression of case gain.
In my not so humble opinion, the breeding and reinforcement of separateness in the student comes from the overarching administrative and cultural influences of scientology, which in of themselves are a questionable representation of scientology personal enhancement technology. I think the majority of us came for personal enhancement and the possibility of genuinely helping others, not stat collection, conditions assignments, injustice, individuation, power trips, and so on. Alan's competitive advantage in that regard was his relaxed approach which allowed for people to overcome their own BPC. I was impressed with the freedom given overwhelmed students to come or go as they pleased until they could sit at length in the class or have a session.
Having audited more than a few pc/clients who were, shall I say, quite disturbed, this auditor, any auditor, simply did not benefit from getting in their space. It did the pc/client no good and left the auditor feeling quite beat up. In such a circumstance confronting is right on target. That would be not confronting in "anger," but confronting as in facing up to the turmoil, pain, etc. As one goes through confronting "being here" or "being with" naturally follows.
I recall LRH speaking of pervading as a method to know about something or someone. Alan spoke of permeation in some of his discussions on a.c.t. Pervasion, permeation, pretty much synonymous. I have experimented with confront vs permeation. The other person, the one on the receiving end, could tell the difference without a doubt. So, yes, permeation is good! It's even very sexy in the appropriate context. I just think TR-0 need not be abandoned. It has its place in the toolbox.
Our problem today, if we care to pass on the wisdom gained from advanced studies and thousands of hours of hard-won experience, is a problem not of how to pass on the written materials, but one of how to allow inquiring students to permeate US. Scientology can't do this for several reasons: 1) the training methods won't allow it, and 2) they have purged the old-timers who held the greatest, most treasured experience. When DM said they have a situation of the "blind leading the blind" in training, he was right. He created the situation!
As a father I can tell you that I want my children to be better than me at everything they choose to do. They should be happier, more prosperous, more in love, ... Everything!
As a teacher I feel the same way about my students.
1) Good post, Roger.
Not to be pedantic here but Confront is not referenced on the Reality Scale.
On the scale called Reality-Spotting by E-Meter, perhaps my favorite of all the scales, Confront is positioned with 1.5, anger, Solid Terminals, and the meter characteristic is a drop (or fall).
2) As a drill TR-0 is fine. I say that because there are many students who will need to come UP to confront before they can rise to greater heights. The entire subject of auditing is about methods to help the pc/client rise in tone, a permanent rise in tone perceived to be the ultimate expression of case gain.
In my not so humble opinion, the breeding and reinforcement of separateness in the student comes from the overarching administrative and cultural influences of scientology, which in of themselves are a questionable representation of scientology personal enhancement technology. I think the majority of us came for personal enhancement and the possibility of genuinely helping others, not stat collection, conditions assignments, injustice, individuation, power trips, and so on. Alan's competitive advantage in that regard was his relaxed approach which allowed for people to overcome their own BPC. I was impressed with the freedom given overwhelmed students to come or go as they pleased until they could sit at length in the class or have a session.
Having audited more than a few pc/clients who were, shall I say, quite disturbed, this auditor, any auditor, simply did not benefit from getting in their space. It did the pc/client no good and left the auditor feeling quite beat up. In such a circumstance confronting is right on target. That would be not confronting in "anger," but confronting as in facing up to the turmoil, pain, etc. As one goes through confronting "being here" or "being with" naturally follows.
I recall LRH speaking of pervading as a method to know about something or someone. Alan spoke of permeation in some of his discussions on a.c.t. Pervasion, permeation, pretty much synonymous. I have experimented with confront vs permeation. The other person, the one on the receiving end, could tell the difference without a doubt. So, yes, permeation is good! It's even very sexy in the appropriate context. I just think TR-0 need not be abandoned. It has its place in the toolbox.
Our problem today, if we care to pass on the wisdom gained from advanced studies and thousands of hours of hard-won experience, is a problem not of how to pass on the written materials, but one of how to allow inquiring students to permeate US. Scientology can't do this for several reasons: 1) the training methods won't allow it, and 2) they have purged the old-timers who held the greatest, most treasured experience. When DM said they have a situation of the "blind leading the blind" in training, he was right. He created the situation!
As a father I can tell you that I want my children to be better than me at everything they choose to do. They should be happier, more prosperous, more in love, ... Everything!
As a teacher I feel the same way about my students.
Terril park
Sponsor
I like this new emphasis. Also after having gone exterior there is not necessarily any reason to do int ext, unless you have the problems associated with int ext. I speak not as a techie but one who has gone ext very many times with no resulting bad effects.
Its sort of the equivalent of having looked at something on the Internet,
or having a friend who's critical, saying one must be PTS.
Terril park
Sponsor
I agree. I've done loads of TRS including pro TRs twice, and once with a class VIII who was trained by Hubbard on the experimental 1962 briefing course.
Also many other times of TRs training over and above daily TRs in study or interneships.
Got great case gain and am able to communicate, and receive communication pretty well.
RogerB
Crusader
My mom used to wear Chanel No 5 and she smelled so-o-o-o good. I liked it so much on her that I tried to wear it many times and it always smelled not good on me
Yes, FoTi, different body chemistry.
In London there is a perfumery named Floris, in Jermine Street. Ladies who are switched on, go there and have perfumes tailored to best complement their particular underlying aroma
Floris is the Queen's perfumer. It's a wonderful store. Been there doing this this for centuries.
My personal favorites among perfumes for my lovelies is Guerlain, French, of course, it's not as sharp as the Channels. While I have bought Floris as a gift for friends and business colleagues it is not one I've had on my lovelies to snuggle into
R
lkwdblds
Crusader
Excellent points Ted
On the word "confront", when I read TRO training stress, I never interpreted it to carry the anger connotation which is shown in dictionaries. I was lucky in this regard as I did not exhibit any of the characteristics of anger or opposition which are stressed in most of the dictionary definitions.
Looking back, I undoubtedly had a misunderstood on the word confront which was never detected by C of S. In all dictionary sources, the first 2 or 3 definitions of "confront" emphasize the anger component of the word. Only the final definition, in all sources, says merely to face something.
HUBBARD DID NOT MAKE IT CLEAR THAT IT WAS THE LAST DEFINITION IN THE DICTIONARIES, THE LEAST COMMON DEFINITION IN USAGE, WHICH HE WANTED US TO USE. It is really amazing that he did not clarify anywhere what sense of the word he wanted used. Maybe he purposely did not mention this, realizing full well that different types of auditors would be produced. Depending on which definition was used, one could be a friendly caring type of auditor, which I was, or a no nonsense militaristic approach type of auditor which several of the top auditors were.
The top auditors usually tempered their militaristic confrontational approach to auditing with ARC. They could bark out commands but they also could turn on the charm and establish empathy with their pc's as well.
TR0 and "ETHICS PRESENCE" - Ethics presence was always being emphasized among staff members. When someone had high ethics presence, they gave off an aura, "Don't mess with me or you'll be sorry." I never could attain that because I was too kind hearted. This was considered a defect in me which would hinder me from rising in the ranks. I was told to work on this and made a little progress but never made the big break through.
ODDLY ENOUGH, HAD I USED DEFINITIONS 1,2 OR 3 OF THE WORD "CONFRONT", I WOULD HAVE HAD MUCH MORE ETHICS PRESENCE BUT CONTINUING TO USE DEF. #4, I NEVER ACHIEVED WHAT MY SENIORS WANTED.
The root word for the word "confront" is given as the French word "adjoin". In looking up "adjoin", it simply means 'to share a border or boundary with". The root word does not have any sense of anger or opposition. This is far fetched but perhaps the penchant the French have for losing wars may stem from their synonym for "confront" not containing the connotion of opposition or anger. How about the Italians, and their word for "confront"? They have not been ferocious soldiers either.
Lakey
1) Good post, Roger.
Not to be pedantic here but Confront is not referenced on the Reality Scale.
On the scale called Reality-Spotting by E-Meter, perhaps my favorite of all the scales, Confront is positioned with 1.5, anger, Solid Terminals, and the meter characteristic is a drop (or fall).
2) As a drill TR-0 is fine. I say that because there are many students who will need to come UP to confront before they can rise to greater heights. The entire subject of auditing is about methods to help the pc/client rise in tone, a permanent rise in tone perceived to be the ultimate expression of case gain.
In my not so humble opinion, the breeding and reinforcement of separateness in the student comes from the overarching administrative and cultural influences of scientology, which in of themselves are a questionable representation of scientology personal enhancement technology. I think the majority of us came for personal enhancement and the possibility of genuinely helping others, not stat collection, conditions assignments, injustice, individuation, power trips, and so on. Alan's competitive advantage in that regard was his relaxed approach which allowed for people to overcome their own BPC. I was impressed with the freedom given overwhelmed students to come or go as they pleased until they could sit at length in the class or have a session.
Having audited more than a few pc/clients who were, shall I say, quite disturbed, this auditor, any auditor, simply did not benefit from getting in their space. It did the pc/client no good and left the auditor feeling quite beat up. In such a circumstance confronting is right on target. That would be not confronting in "anger," but confronting as in facing up to the turmoil, pain, etc. As one goes through confronting "being here" or "being with" naturally follows.
I recall LRH speaking of pervading as a method to know about something or someone. Alan spoke of permeation in some of his discussions on a.c.t. Pervasion, permeation, pretty much synonymous. I have experimented with confront vs permeation. The other person, the one on the receiving end, could tell the difference without a doubt. So, yes, permeation is good! It's even very sexy in the appropriate context. I just think TR-0 need not be abandoned. It has its place in the toolbox.
Our problem today, if we care to pass on the wisdom gained from advanced studies and thousands of hours of hard-won experience, is a problem not of how to pass on the written materials, but one of how to allow inquiring students to permeate US. Scientology can't do this for several reasons: 1) the training methods won't allow it, and 2) they have purged the old-timers who held the greatest, most treasured experience. When DM said they have a situation of the "blind leading the blind" in training, he was right. He created the situation!
As a father I can tell you that I want my children to be better than me at everything they choose to do. They should be happier, more prosperous, more in love, ... Everything!
As a teacher I feel the same way about my students.
On the word "confront", when I read TRO training stress, I never interpreted it to carry the anger connotation which is shown in dictionaries. I was lucky in this regard as I did not exhibit any of the characteristics of anger or opposition which are stressed in most of the dictionary definitions.
Looking back, I undoubtedly had a misunderstood on the word confront which was never detected by C of S. In all dictionary sources, the first 2 or 3 definitions of "confront" emphasize the anger component of the word. Only the final definition, in all sources, says merely to face something.
HUBBARD DID NOT MAKE IT CLEAR THAT IT WAS THE LAST DEFINITION IN THE DICTIONARIES, THE LEAST COMMON DEFINITION IN USAGE, WHICH HE WANTED US TO USE. It is really amazing that he did not clarify anywhere what sense of the word he wanted used. Maybe he purposely did not mention this, realizing full well that different types of auditors would be produced. Depending on which definition was used, one could be a friendly caring type of auditor, which I was, or a no nonsense militaristic approach type of auditor which several of the top auditors were.
The top auditors usually tempered their militaristic confrontational approach to auditing with ARC. They could bark out commands but they also could turn on the charm and establish empathy with their pc's as well.
TR0 and "ETHICS PRESENCE" - Ethics presence was always being emphasized among staff members. When someone had high ethics presence, they gave off an aura, "Don't mess with me or you'll be sorry." I never could attain that because I was too kind hearted. This was considered a defect in me which would hinder me from rising in the ranks. I was told to work on this and made a little progress but never made the big break through.
ODDLY ENOUGH, HAD I USED DEFINITIONS 1,2 OR 3 OF THE WORD "CONFRONT", I WOULD HAVE HAD MUCH MORE ETHICS PRESENCE BUT CONTINUING TO USE DEF. #4, I NEVER ACHIEVED WHAT MY SENIORS WANTED.
The root word for the word "confront" is given as the French word "adjoin". In looking up "adjoin", it simply means 'to share a border or boundary with". The root word does not have any sense of anger or opposition. This is far fetched but perhaps the penchant the French have for losing wars may stem from their synonym for "confront" not containing the connotion of opposition or anger. How about the Italians, and their word for "confront"? They have not been ferocious soldiers either.
Lakey
Last edited:
RogerB
Crusader
1) Good post, Roger.
Not to be pedantic here but Confront is not referenced on the Reality Scale.
On the scale called Reality-Spotting by E-Meter, perhaps my favorite of all the scales, Confront is positioned with 1.5, anger, Solid Terminals, and the meter characteristic is a drop (or fall).
2) As a drill TR-0 is fine. I say that because there are many students who will need to come UP to confront before they can rise to greater heights. The entire subject of auditing is about methods to help the pc/client rise in tone, a permanent rise in tone perceived to be the ultimate expression of case gain.
In my not so humble opinion, the breeding and reinforcement of separateness in the student comes from the overarching administrative and cultural influences of scientology, which in of themselves are a questionable representation of scientology personal enhancement technology. I think the majority of us came for personal enhancement and the possibility of genuinely helping others, not stat collection, conditions assignments, injustice, individuation, power trips, and so on. Alan's competitive advantage in that regard was his relaxed approach which allowed for people to overcome their own BPC. I was impressed with the freedom given overwhelmed students to come or go as they pleased until they could sit at length in the class or have a session.
Having audited more than a few pc/clients who were, shall I say, quite disturbed, this auditor, any auditor, simply did not benefit from getting in their space. It did the pc/client no good and left the auditor feeling quite beat up. In such a circumstance confronting is right on target. That would be not confronting in "anger," but confronting as in facing up to the turmoil, pain, etc. As one goes through confronting "being here" or "being with" naturally follows.
I recall LRH speaking of pervading as a method to know about something or someone. Alan spoke of permeation in some of his discussions on a.c.t. Pervasion, permeation, pretty much synonymous. I have experimented with confront vs permeation. The other person, the one on the receiving end, could tell the difference without a doubt. So, yes, permeation is good! It's even very sexy in the appropriate context. I just think TR-0 need not be abandoned. It has its place in the toolbox.
Our problem today, if we care to pass on the wisdom gained from advanced studies and thousands of hours of hard-won experience, is a problem not of how to pass on the written materials, but one of how to allow inquiring students to permeate US. Scientology can't do this for several reasons: 1) the training methods won't allow it, and 2) they have purged the old-timers who held the greatest, most treasured experience. When DM said they have a situation of the "blind leading the blind" in training, he was right. He created the situation!
As a father I can tell you that I want my children to be better than me at everything they choose to do. They should be happier, more prosperous, more in love, ... Everything!
As a teacher I feel the same way about my students.
Good and correct points here, Ted.
Funny I "always" had it in my head that Confront was "@ 2.0 on the scale" with Experience going from 2.0 to 4.0. But I see in 0-8, you are correct with Confront at 1.5. Vaguely I seem to remember an early HCOB version and then him screwing around with things like "old" and "new" versions
which we now see in the book 0-8.It is true that folks come up to the ability to confront. I did so in 1957 . . . but way O/R and got stuck at confront thereafter. It was not until I got the idea of presence with, and being at one with, that I progressed beyond that stuck position of "confront."
As to the dictionary definitions of the word, well, if folks all went to the dictionary and then, if they selected the correct definition and, if they understood it, we'd have had some progress. But, folks run with the understanding of words as ingrained in them . . . particularly when they get the screed from LRH. Lakey summed this issue up rather well.
It is also true that coming up to confront for many, many folks is a major gain. But even so it is a limiting proposition for many. I have had to help many overcome or get free from the limited, stuck position/"thing" of confronting in order that they can move onto the freedom of being able to truly be as they choose.
Basically, LRH's focus of tech was mainly below 2.0 on the scales . . . . comparatively very little addressed areas of existence higher on the scales.
Many folks actually only get processed up to "freedom from (slot in the what here)" and get parked at 0.0---failure. That is, they address a case area that for them is an area below 0.0 . . . . and area that for them is fraught with failures and suffering; then they "handle it" only to be left just above or at 0.0 without being taken up higher to competence and mastery over the area.
Big flunk of tech that one.
Ditto many areas of case only taken up to 2.0--2.25 on the scale with PC left there without being taken up to full knowing cause on the area. Ditto big flunk of tech.
In other words, too much of Scn (and some other practices) are focused on ridding the client of what affects them without also then proceeding to go higher and restoring their full knowing cause in the area of what had affected them and held them in an effect condition.
And so, we see so many Scn types who feel they had "wins" but can't figure out why they still suffer unwanted conditions and subsequent cave-ins . . . well, one big part of it is that they have never completed handling various areas of case addressed.
Rog
CarmeloOrchards
Crusader
This post started me looking at what we were posting a year ago. That was how I found Roger's post on confronting.
To anyone reading this thread, old or new alike, there are some real gems in the stuff from 2009. The Apollo thread hasn't had any slack periods.
I started a thread last week which has grown to over 6,000 views. It amazes me the speed with which ESMB is moving in terms of readers.
"The whole idea is to get the student able to be there comfortably in a position three feet in front of a preclear, to BE there and not do anything else but BE there."
...
"The drill is misnamed if confronting means to DO something to the pc. The whole action is to accustom an auditor to BEING THERE three feet in front of a preclear without apologizing or moving or being startled or embarrassed or defending self."
...
"The drill is misnamed if confronting means to DO something to the pc. The whole action is to accustom an auditor to BEING THERE three feet in front of a preclear without apologizing or moving or being startled or embarrassed or defending self."
lkwdblds
Crusader
Thanks for informing us of your new thread!
Carmelo, Thanks for letting us know about your new thread. I have mainly been posting only on the Apollo thread for several months now. I am looking for another interesting venue to post on. I'll check out your thread today.
I saw an interesting thread today by Programmer Guy about tracking cookies and how they can invade your privacy and mess up your computer.
THE APOLLO 1973 THREAD A YEAR AGO
I'll have to check that out. When my CCLA story ended around early November, I remember that Carmelo came aboard full force and we were discussing the best eating places near the orgs, the best radio stations and disc jockeys and then we got into entertainers and had a lot of fun with Jack Benny. Sweetness and Light, Carmelo and I were the spearheads of the thread.
In December I did my story on the Origins of Celebrity Centre and made sure that Yvonne Jentzdch received the credit she deserved for starting and building up that Org and its network.
Carmelo is the one who sought to interest people who were authorites on tech and who were writing articles on ESMB in tech and other areas which were brilliant articles but were not getting much readership. It was his brainchild to create an interesting thread with high readership so that the articles posted by these luminaries would be read by more readers.
He posed the idea to me and suggested some posts which I could write while he dug in and wrote posts totally different from mine to offer contrast and more variety of posting. Whatever we did, we did it correctly. Carmelo also introduced extensive use of photgraphs and videos which has attracted a large class of quality viewers.
To me, this thread is a perfect example of what Hubbard described as the condition of Power. The thread just keeps growing and getting better. The readership just keeps growing. It is self generated.....You can't kill it, even with a stick. Nobody is making a concerted effort to get the readership or the quality of the posts up, it is just happening on its own, being driven by the people who read the thread and post here.
Its good to be able to go back and read what we were doing a year ago and discover again how much quality there was on the thread at that time.
Lakey
Carmelo, Thanks for letting us know about your new thread. I have mainly been posting only on the Apollo thread for several months now. I am looking for another interesting venue to post on. I'll check out your thread today.
I saw an interesting thread today by Programmer Guy about tracking cookies and how they can invade your privacy and mess up your computer.
THE APOLLO 1973 THREAD A YEAR AGO
I'll have to check that out. When my CCLA story ended around early November, I remember that Carmelo came aboard full force and we were discussing the best eating places near the orgs, the best radio stations and disc jockeys and then we got into entertainers and had a lot of fun with Jack Benny. Sweetness and Light, Carmelo and I were the spearheads of the thread.
In December I did my story on the Origins of Celebrity Centre and made sure that Yvonne Jentzdch received the credit she deserved for starting and building up that Org and its network.
Carmelo is the one who sought to interest people who were authorites on tech and who were writing articles on ESMB in tech and other areas which were brilliant articles but were not getting much readership. It was his brainchild to create an interesting thread with high readership so that the articles posted by these luminaries would be read by more readers.
He posed the idea to me and suggested some posts which I could write while he dug in and wrote posts totally different from mine to offer contrast and more variety of posting. Whatever we did, we did it correctly. Carmelo also introduced extensive use of photgraphs and videos which has attracted a large class of quality viewers.
To me, this thread is a perfect example of what Hubbard described as the condition of Power. The thread just keeps growing and getting better. The readership just keeps growing. It is self generated.....You can't kill it, even with a stick. Nobody is making a concerted effort to get the readership or the quality of the posts up, it is just happening on its own, being driven by the people who read the thread and post here.
Its good to be able to go back and read what we were doing a year ago and discover again how much quality there was on the thread at that time.
Lakey
Last edited:
SweetnessandLight
Crusader
Good Stuff!
Yep!
Keep on growing, everybody!
I've learned a lot this past year, haven't you?
Yep!
Keep on growing, everybody! I've learned a lot this past year, haven't you?
- Status