That's not how I see it. I see clear as your condition when you are not presently restimulated: you have control of your emotions, are responding appropriately to your environment given your consciously aware set of goals (nothing suppressed and generating conflict/dissonance).
I think Ron had it wrong in terms of it being something that is a stable state, because I believe one only approaches this by constantly confronting reality as it is to the best of your ability. We have certain threshholds, though, at which we cannot function (having a fever over 107 degrees for instance should kill you in an hour). When those threshholds are exceeded, one's "clarity" simply cannot be maintained. Hubbard had it RIGHT, though, IMO, when he said the "analyzer" shuts off during "engrams" (which I term "traumatic incidents", because I think it is more accurate), and that a person can be deranged by this, afterward, and if they don't correct their derangement, can have secondary traumatic stress, and suffer from a variety of symptoms, which fall under the rubric of PTSD, these days.
However, even when a person is totally free from traumatic stress, in their own estimation, they never display what Ron defined as the State of Clear. Memory is not accurate the way Ron thought, lifespan is not significantly improved, if at all (it may be, IMO, if a person had less stress in their life, that they would be less liable to suffer illness, as stress decreases immune response).
I consider it a deliberate "trance" state, valuable in pressure situations and for recovering from stressful situations, but more of a "safe mode" existence than I wish to lead. I enjoy feeling emotions, I enjoy "plus randomity" and zanyness. Safe Mode is not for me.
