WHAT DETERMINES HOW YOU FEEL v2.0
HomerWSmith at lightlink.com
HomerWSmith at lightlink.com
Sat Jan 19 17:50:22 EST 2013
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
WHAT DETERMINES HOW YOU FEEL?
> OT XV (OT XVI?)
> Certainty of the future.
> Is this not known now? Do you know the OT IX to OT XII ones?
They are not publically released, and no I don't know them.
But you know OT VIII is basically
What determines how you feel?
If you can get someone to put an 'other determinism' there enough,
he will suddenly find he is determining the other determinism to be
Knowing by looking flip flops to looking by knowing.
That's the observation/consideration flip flop.
There are two opposing definitions of To Determine.
The first is to learn by being an EFFECT what it out there.
The second is to CAUSE what is out there.
To determine by looking moves into to determine by causing.
That is the purpose of auditing.
The preclear is going "What's there? What's there?" trying
to determine or find out what is there.
The auditor goes well ok "Put a cat there. Good, did you
put a cat there?" and the preclear goes "Wow there's a cat there!"
The preclear determined that there will be a cat there,
and then determned or verified there was a cat there.
So he is now operating both sides of To Determine.
That is way higher than "What's there?" effect, effect, effect.
Run the following with "Get the idea of ...".
"There is NO DETERMINING"
"There is SOME DETERMINING" Run both definitions
Run truth with
"There is NO TRUTH."
"There is SOME TRUTH."
Run Character with:
"There is NO Author"
"There is SOME Author"
"There is NO Character"
"There is SOME Character"
Future is the same way:
"There is NO FUTURE." Run PAST and PRESENT too.
"There is SOME FUTURE."
"There is NO CAUSE" Run on OTHER CAUSE also.
"There is SOME CAUSE"
All the complexity in auditing is a waste of time.
The higher the OT level, the simpler the issue and the simpler the
auditing to run it.
Sometimes you gotta run refused, no, inhibited, enforced, desired,
curious about, known about, and source of. But most often NO and SOME
work just fine.
"There is NO BRAIN"
"There is SOME BRAIN"
"There is NO PROOF"
"There is SOME PROOF"
The real answer to the prove it cases is to give them a solo
process they can run for a few hours across many days, that will show
that "Scn is good thing and ought to be continued".
Much better than dropping an atom bomb on their soul.
The OT's who HAVE power are nervous about it and how is someone who
doesn't have power going to respond to it.
It's one thing to move the marble on the table, quite another to
move a meatball to reason about it.
Fools rush in where Angels dare not tread and God's go crying for
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer at lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Tue Apr 22 15:00:00 EDT 2008
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Sat Jan 19 17:50:22 EST 2013
Send mail to archive.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning but
Not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the HomerWSmith-L