On Tue, 31 Oct 2000 14:12:33 GMT, "M. C. DiPietra" <email@example.com> wrote:
>in article firstname.lastname@example.org, Gerry Armstrong at
>email@example.com wrote on 10/30/00 5:43 PM:
>> On Sun, 29 Oct 2000 16:20:37 GMT, Richard<firstname.lastname@example.org>
>>> On Sun, 29 Oct 2000 12:13:13 +0100, "roger gonnet"
>>> <email@example.com> wrote:
>>>> Please, do your L & N on this question ;(listing and nulling, a process who
>>>> should "give you the right item in answer")
>>>> (the question being directed only to those having been ate least 12-18
>>>> months in scientology):
>>>> "From you, who has NOT BEEN handled as a PTS while in scientology"?
>>> Sorry, that question will always read since the keyword is not at the
>>> end. Trust me on this: I was trained as class IV and did nothing but
>>> Phrase it thus:
>>> While you where in Scientology, who was not handled as a PTS?
>>> I think you should get a nice instant, persistent, Theta bop on this
>>> as the PC will instantly attain the stage of Wanting-to-get-out just
>>> after realizing he knows of nobody who was not handled as a PTS during
>>> all that time.
>> Remember, God is the LFBD F/N item for every properly asked L & N
>> And indeed you'll find that God remains completely unhandled by
>> LFBD F/TA.
>> (c) Gerry Armstrong
>Gerry, I think this is an important point. But could you explain it so that
>non-Scns like me can really understand?
Thanks for asking.
There are some people on a.r.s. and abroad who have libraries of Hubbard's writings and who perhaps will add some of his statements on listing and nulling. I'm sure it has a big section in the index to the Tech Volumes which I don't have with me. It is a significant, identifiable process and technique in $cientology auditing. I audited L & N sessions and steps in the RPF, in fact the vast majority of the auditing I did was in the RPF, supervised by the first and foremost $nr C$ Int (Senior Case Supervisor International) and crammed by our Blown Busdriver ®, the Flag Cramming Officer. And of course through my $cientology years I had L & N done and run on me many times. Inside $cientology, still hoping that the tech would "work," I found L & N, along with the concept of "assessments," which are also set processes and auditing techniques related to L & N, to be evidence that auditing was, as I was being told, scientific and brilliant.
Again, techie archivists are invited to participate and say what source says, and what you have to say about what source says. These are just my thoughts nineteen years after my last auditing session. L & N seeks to find an "item," a sort of single answer, to a kind of question which invites an identifiable single item for the single possible answer. They commonly begin with "Who" or "What" or "Who or what," although it is the nature and intention, rather than the "Who" or "what" or other form, which makes an L & N question what it is. It seeks an item by getting the person to list all the possibilities and through the L&N processing technique and according to the meter, finding or determining the item.
A question, which we could hear in any conversation on any day, which could generate a list in search of the item, which would be a person or thing or activity, might be: "What makes you the way you are?" In casual conversation, the list and the item and even if the process was done to any kind of EP (End Phenomena: the expected and only allowable occurrences at the end of a process) is completely dependent on outside forces. But, theorizes Hubbard, questions can be asked in life, even in a casual conversation, which cause a person to list, that is, list the possible answers or items, and like as not, lacking $cientology, give themselves no item or the wrong item. In $cientology this would be self-listing, a completely impermissible activity, and absolute evidence of an "out-list," indicative of a "wrong-item."
Permissible listing in $cientology occurs (in the best of all possible $cientology worlds) only in the auditing session, as directed by the C/S (Case Supervisor: instructs the auditor what processes to run). In the auditing session, every deep question, such as "What makes you the way you are?" can be audited to full EP. A person with an out list, which, Hubbard says quite clearly, can occur in session or in life, manifests in various BIs (Bad Indicators ® [but good band name]:-)-<-<. Perhaps the tech archivists will post Hubbard's symptoms for out lists. I think it would add greatly to everyone's enjoyment of this subject.
The question, "What makes you the way you are?" clearly (I almost never have successfully resisted using that word if it was even remotely appropriate) has for anyone, any number of answers depending on any number of things including any number of ways you might be looking at the way you are. Hubbard states, and every auditor knows, that there is one item and one item alone. The discovery of that one item will be accompanied by a Long Fall Blow Down (LFBD) , a Floating Needle (F/N), a cognition (cog) and other Very Good Indicators (VGIs), which would have the preclear being audited happy, smiling, laughing, or crying for joy, etc. During this EP, the auditor will indicate to the preclear that the item, the LFBD F/N item, is his or her item. Something just like this: "I'd like to indicate that [blah blah blah] is your item."
If a person were asked, "What makes you the way you are?" sitting in a session in a black boiler suit right after being ordered to the RPF for R/Sing (Rockslam: needle movement indicating an evil intention), the list and item are going to be one set. A different set would be obtained from the same question asked of, let's say, the owner of the Coleman Lantern Company, in a $700.00 per hour weanie dusting session after going Full OT VIII. "What makes you the way you are?" "Ron." LFBD F/N.
"L&N can either be a set, well established process which will not change in $cientology until the end of time. (Techies please give us some classics.) One of the Grade IV processes comes to mind: "What do you use to make others wrong?" or close to that. Everyone gets run on that process who proceeds through the $cientology "grades." Grade IV is a search for a preclear's service facsimile, the picture, computation and resultant set of actions, by which a person, stupidly (otherwise why get rid of it or change anything?), makes other people wrong, and makes himself right. The irony is that $cientology is what $cientologists use to make other people (what other people are there but *wogs* ®? ) wrong , and make themselves right. Because $cientologists must dramatize a serfac ($cientology is indeed an item) just to be $cientologists, they really must, in order to escape their fixed condition, become born again wogs ®.
There are certain times in auditing when something a pc says while being run on one process requires the auditor to run L & N as a technique on the something said. Let's say the pc starts talking about having the heebie-jeebies and there's a long fall on heebie-jeebies (LF). An L & N question which might result from that could be, "Who or what gives you the heebie-jeebies?" When the auditor asks an L & N question he would expect it to read, that is, produce a small fall, fall, long fall or long fall blowdown at the end of the question. A long fall blowdown is a fall which goes off the meter dial (blowing down) requiring the lowering of the Tone Arm (TA) to get the needle back on the dial. This meter movement, the LFBD, followed by an F/N, is required upon the pc's identification of the sought item.
The auditor asks the question, it reads, and he gets the pc to answer with items. The auditor writes down the pc's answers, and notes any reads (SF, F, LF, LFBD). If the pc exhausts his list without getting an LFBD F/N item, the auditor will null the list, eliminating unreading items by assessment, by repeating the pc's items to him and recording the instant meter reads as each item is called. Supposedly, the item left reading after all others have ceased reading is the item. If the wrong item is indicated so Hubbard says, the pc will spin. There is famous Repair List, the L4[--], for repairing out lists, wrong items, and all the things which can go wrong with L & N.
$cientologists are actually knowingly running black $cientology on people all the time, and one of the common techniques is black L & N. $cientologists practice black $cientology on wogs ® and even on $cientologists because that it's perfectly okay to do so. $cientologists are implanted with the wrong item that "suppressive persons" are the source of their problems, and the companion wrong item that the only handling (an item) for SPs (and for that matter any problem) is to "attack."
You'll find the $cientologists assigned to "handle" picketers ask listing questions designed to spin in the picketers. "What is your crime?" is one of their favorites. $cientology tech really is black $cientology tech when it's realized that all of the question asking is designed to ensure the people being asked never find the answer. The questions are there also to get rich $cientologists to pay mountains of money to find answers. And the questions are asked so $cientologists never cognite that $cientology is the item on their case.
In the question, "Who or what gives you the heebie-jeebies?" are the implications that you have, or at least get, the heebie-jeebies, that heebie-jeebies are real, and that there is a single source for the heebie-jeebies you have, or have gotten. The list can go on and on, and the item change throughout a pc's auditing lifetime. A person who knows that God is the LFBD F/N item to every properly asked L & N question, however, would know instantly that "Who or what gives you the heebie-jeebies?" is an improper L & N question, since God doesn't, among the His manifold Gifts, give the heebie-jeebies. And let's say that God does give good heebie-jeebies; He's still the LFBD F/N Item.
The question, "What makes you the way you are?" can provoke all sorts of answers, and to a thoughtful $cientologist perhaps, "I do," sounding very responsible and an answer $cientology can use, would be an acceptable LFBD F/N item. $cientologists, after all, are implanted with the idea that they are "responsible for their own condition." The only LFBD F/N item if the question is properly asked, however, is God. And indeed, the way a pc really is is exactly as God created him or her.
The question, "What do you use to make others wrong?" wrongly indicates that you do something to achieve that goal. If you knew that you couldn't make anyone wrong, because everyone is as God made him, why go searching for something you don't want to do and can't do? Since God created wogs ® and others in His Image, He doesn't make anyone wrong. "What makes you right?" is a perfectly proper L & N question. Although, it's probably observable that if God is indeed the LFBD F/N answer to every properly asked L & N question, then there isn't much of a need to ask much of anything at all.
In every circumstance, qualified, it goes without saying, by safety, courtesy and wisdom, one can look to God for the answer to the question. $cientology does not permit God to be anyone's item, nor to be the Source of the answers, nor to even be the Source of the $cientologist. $cientology, through its Godless "spiritual technology," seeks to be the "source" of answers, of wisdom, of life itself, to $cientologists; plus wants to give the same mind-numbing, heart-stopping wrong item to unsuspecting wogs ®.
Ask any $cientologist, "What works?" and the LFBD F/N item will be "$cientology." Yet it can be demonstrated by records, by reason and by actual scientific experiment and proof that $cientology doesn't work. It is a wrong item. $cientology is the right item to the question, "What doesn't work?" but no $cientologist could possibly list it. It is in any case a question which doesn't even have to be asked, since God is the LFBD F/N item to the properly asked question, "What works?"
In every circumstance I have found that the item is God. LFBD/FN.