************* The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] ************
Hi Paul,
You also make some good points. Notice that I wrote: Mike posted this on Ifachat, I thought it had some good data, so I > > thought to post it here: I didn't feel like dissecting it and explaining which I thought was good and not good. I thought it was just good to bring to attention and awareness and let the reader reason and figure it out for himself. I ( as I suppose everyone did) worked with many groups, companies, work crews and clubs and what not over the years. I have seen very different conditions and tone levels of groups. I have been part of groups where the leader was high toned and the group was a powerful force. A lot of things (work) got done with a lot of enjoyment and satisfaction and with seemingly little effort. it was just a flow of going through the motions and things got done. To the opposite, where nothing went right and there was a lot of mutiny and the like. And everything in between. That is kind of the point I wanted to make, without saying. I also read the work of Lao Russel, the wife of Walter Russel. She wrote some very hight OT philosophy on love and relationships and spirituality. One thing that stands out for me is that she said ( and I will say in scn terms as it is easier to explain that way): One person can do x amount of work. Two middle toned people ( couple) can do 2x amount of work. If a couple are both high toned, spiritually well developed and well matched, that couple can accomplish x to the nth degree amount of work. That means that couple's output or potential is exponential, compared to the ordinary mediocre couple with is more or less arithmetic at best. Groups of any kind are similar. The more theta, the more the potential. David > From: [email protected] > Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 10:14:07 -0700 > To: [email protected] > Subject: [TROM1] LRH > > ************* > The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] > ************ > Hi David, > > Your post of LRH is a very good one. > > Upon one's realization of the underlying context of the PL, then one > would have to inspect several things. Those inspections would be > one's own purpose, the purpose of the organization and then the > individuals of the organization and then don't forget to examine the > purposes of those individuals and organizations that are external to > oneself and the organization. > > Once this is done in an organized way or hap hazardly as sources come > into view, one could then start aligning and correcting purposes to > improve one's self and organizations. > > This can also become monumental inasmuch as there are an infinite > amount of purposes as well as an infinite amount of hierarchies of > purposes from just individual to individual. I dare say that just > correcting and aligning one purpose, that of an organization and the > individuals in that organization could easily turn into a more than a > single life time endeavor. Keep in mind that purposes must and do > change from moment to moment for Life cannot possibly be comprised of > only one purpose at all times for all times, let alone moment to > moment. And don't overlook the fact that if for once everyone > whether individual or organization had exactly the same purpose, > there would be no Life, no randomity and therefore no freedom or free- > will. > > So complete organization and alignment of a purpose technically, > absolutely and totally cannot ever be achieved for it would rule out > Life altogether and put death in as the final result. So between no > purpose and organization along lines of purpose, there is an optimal > state somewhere in the middle and that middle must also allowed to > float freely for statics cannot be achieved either in MEST or Life. > > This is where the Church and the SO fail miserably. Possibly LRH did > or did not recognize this, we will never know. One thing is for > sure, it currently is not being recognized and the Church and the SO > are what they are at the moment. Hence we have strict, inviolate > rules, overbearing orders, punishment and heavy arm-twisting > correction. There you have the self-imposed and self created trap of > the Church and SO. > > If you want to live Life, if you want to have a Life keep this in > mind. Purposes are dynamic. Do not turn a purpose into a trap for > yourself and others. There are enough of these already. Stop making > more and working to enforce more. > > Live with freedom and free-will for yourself and others and adhere to > 'the greatest good for the greatest number'. You can actually not do > more than this. > > Paul/Level 5 in progress > > On Jul 22, 2012, at 8:24 AM, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > > > LRH: Begin > > > > "As Man all too easily specializes in stops he tends to stress what > > SHOULDN'T be done. While this enters into it, remember that it's a > > STOP. > > > > STOPS ALL OCCUR BECAUSE OF FAILED PURPOSES. > > > > BEHIND EVERY STOP THERE IS A FAILED PURPOSE. > > > > A stuck picture or a motionless org are similar. Each has behind > > it a failed purpose. > > > > THERE IS A LAW ABOUT THIS-ALL YOU HAVE TO DO TO RESTORE LIFE AND > > ACTION > > IS TO REKINDLE THE FAILED PURPOSE. THE STOPS WILL AT ONCE BLOW. > > > > That law (it comes out of OT VIII materials) is so powerful it > > would practically revive the dead! > > > > It applies to orgs. > > > > It applies to cities or nations. > > > > When you diverge from a constructive purpose to "stop attacks", the > > purpose has been abandoned. You get a stop. The real way to stop > > attacks > > is to widen one's zone of responsibility. And pour the coal on the > > purpose. Thus all attacks one makes should be in THE DIRECTION OF > > ENLARGING ONE'S SCOPE AND AUGMENTING BASIC PURPOSE. > > > > Thus, in the case of Scientology orgs one should attack with the > > end in > > view of taking over the whole field of Mental Healing. If our purpose > > was this then it had to be this on all dynamics. We only got into > > trouble by failing to take responsibility for the whole field! > > > > We'll win back by reasserting that responsibility and making it good. > > > > Targets, to that degree, are purposes. > > > > Purposes must be executed. They are something to DO. > > > > OT > > > > Let us look at the definition of OT-cause over Thought Life Form > > Matter Energy Space and Time. > > > > As one falls away from that one becomes a SPECTATOR, then one > > becomes an effect. Then one is gone. > > > > One causes things by action. Not by thinking dim thoughts. > > > > One can be doing an IN basket as simply a spectator. > > > > In the society today spectatorism is very common. Magazine writers, > > reporters write weird pieces that look at how odd things are. The > > writer > > doesn't understand them at all. He just watches them. > > > > Spectatorism is not so low as total effect. > > > > The total effect-no cause-person has mainly a case. He doesn't > > even look. > > > > Thus there is a gradient scale of OT. It's not an absolute. One is > > as OT as he can CAUSE things. > > > > One of the things to cause is target attainment. When somebody can > > push through a target to completion he's to that degree OT. > > > > People who don't push targets are either just spectators or they > > are total effect." > > > > Quote from OEC Volumes > > > > Copyright. L. Ron Hubbard 1969. > _______________________________________________ > Trom mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
_______________________________________________ Trom mailing list [email protected] http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
