Vinaire's Blog
Reference: Course on Subject Clearing
Reference: Comments on Books
Here is my study of Scientology.
.
Reference: Data Series
Reference: Data Series 25—LEARNING TO USE DATA ANALYSIS
.
The first section lists the barriers to being able to use Data Analysis and how to handle them.
.
When one begins to apply Data Analysis he is often still trying to grasp the data about Data Analysis rather than the out-points in the Data. Just become more familiar with the Data Series.
To know the Ideal Scene one has only to work out the correct products for it. If these aren’t getting out, then there is a departure. By handling one is simply trying to get the scene to get out its products. Unless one proceeds from product back to Establishment, one can’t analyze much of anything.
There is always a product for any scene. A product is something on can HAVE. It is a completed thing that has Exchange value within or outside the activity. If there were no product, there could not really be an Ideal Scene.
.
A beginner can juggle around and go badly adrift if he doesn’t follow the pattern:
.
One has to be able to think with outpoints. A crude way of saying this is “learn to think like an idiot”. One could also add “without abandoning any ability to think like a genius”.
An Evaluator who listens to people on the scene and takes their WHYs runs a grave risk. If these were the Whys then things would be better.
A far safer way is to talk only insofar as finding what the product is concerned and investigating. Get the big peak period of production (now or in the past). Compare it to the existing scene just before.
.
A veteran evaluator can toss off evaluations in an hour or two, mainly based on how long it takes him to dig up data. A big tough situation may require days and days.
Man gets dedicated to his own pet theories very easily. A true scientist doesn’t fixate on one idea. He keeps looking until he finds it, not until his pet theory is proven. That’s the test of an evaluator.
.
One always runs by statistics where these are valid. Statistics must reflect actual desired PRODUCT. If they do not they are not valid. If they do they give an idea of Ideal Scene.
.
Reference: Data Series
Reference: Data Series 24—HANDLING
.
The words “Policy”, “Plans”, “Programs”, “Projects” and “Orders” are often used interchangeably one for the other, incorrectly. To handle any confusions on the words and substance of “Policy”, “Plans”, “Programs”, “Projects” and “Orders” the following DEFINITIONS are laid down for use in Data Series.
POLICY = the rules of the game, the facts of life, the discovered truths and the invariable procedures.
PLANS = the general bright idea one has to remedy the WHY found and get things up to the Ideal Scene or improve even that.
PROGRAM = the sequence of major actions needed to do the Plan.
PROJECT = the sequence of steps necessary to carry out one step in a Program.
ORDERS = some Program steps are so simple that they are themselves an order or an order can simply be a roughly written project.
POLICY is what brings the evaluation into existence in the first place. SITUATION is the departure from or improvement of the Ideal Scene expressed in policy. DATA is the observations leading to INVESTIGATIONS. STATISTICS is the independent continuing survey of production or lack of it. WHY is the real reason found by the investigation. IDEAL SCENE is the state of affairs envisioned by policy or the improvement of even that. Finally, HANDLING consists of plan, program, projects and orders.
.
This section provides the details of how one may track the handling until it is fully done.
.
The word “bugged” is slang for snarled up or halted. DEBUG is to get the snarls or stops out of it. This itself requires an evaluation. The evaluation may be done at a glance or it may take a full formal Evaluation by form.
When “debugging” one usually finds the persons assigned the target already have a “WHY” and it is usually a false Why for if it was the right one the program step would get done. A Project, often written, comes out of this DEBUG EVALUATION. It could be that the original WHY was wrong and a new program is needed.
.
You can find out all the SITUATIONS and WHYS in the world but if there isn’t a PLAN and PROGRAM and if these are not DONE fully, then nothing beneficial will happen.
THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR CORRECTLY DONE DATA ANALYSIS.
THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR NOT GETTING CORRECT PROGRAMS DONE.
.
Reference: Data Series
Reference: Data Series 23—PROPER FORMAT AND CORRECT ACTION
.
When doing an Evaluation, one can become far too fixated on outpoints and miss the real reason one is doing an evaluation in the first place. To handle this, it is proper form to write up an Evaluation so as to keep in view the reason one is doing one.
This is accomplished by using this form
SITUATION:
DATA:
… STATS:
WHY:
IDEAL SCENE:
HANDLING:
A proper evaluation is all of a piece. There is consistency throughout.
OBSERVATION in general must be continuous for situations to be noted. A situation is defined as a not expected state of affairs. It is either very good or it is very bad.
Data is the information one has received that alerts one to the situation. No matter how many reports one may see there is always a question as to their truth. So, one does NOT rely on reports, but an absence of reports, or a volume of reports carefully surveyed for outpoints and counted. Essentially, “data” regarded from the angle of outpoints is a lack of consistency. So the DATA you give is not a lot of reports. It is a brief summary of the “strings pulled” on the outpoint or plus point route to finally get the Why. The Why must be supported by actual investigation.
Situations and DATA trails are supported by Statistics. Where statistics are not in numeral form this may be harder. Where they are outright lies, this is an outpoint itself. One either has a numerical statistic or a direct observation. One can use both. Three or more stats on a scene can be compared to each other and often lead directly to a WHY. DO NOT give a Why or recommend handling without inspecting the actual stats.
A real WHY must lead to a bettering of the existing scene or (in the case of a wonderful new scene) maintaining it as a new Ideal Scene. Therefore the WHY must be something you can do something about. It is not a prejudice or a good idea. It is where all the analysis led.
If a bad situation is a departure from the ideal scene and if a good situation is attaining it or exceeding it, then the crux of any evaluation is THE IDEAL SCENE for the area one is evaluating. Viewpoint has a lot to do with the Ideal Scene. By CONSISTENCY the Ideal Scene must be one for that portion of an activity for which one is trying to find the Why. By giving the IDEAL SCENE for every situation, the evaluator is not led into a fatal contempt for the competence of all work actually being done. The Ideal Scene clarifies for one and all whither we are going.
Handling must be CONSISTENT with the situation, the evaluation, the Why and the Ideal Scene. Handling must be WITHIN THE CAPABILITIES of those who will do the actions. Handling must be WITHIN THE RESOURCES AVAILABLE. The less are the resources available the brighter must be the idea required to attain effective handling. Handling must be SUPERVISED by one person who acts as a Coordinator of the Program and a checker-offer and de-bug expert. And last but most important handling must be EFFECTIVE AND FINAL.
The handling is laid out as a PROGRAM made up of sequential TARGETS. It is expected that any complex or extensive target will have a PROJECT written for it by the person to whom it is assigned if not by the originator. When all targets are DONE full Situation handling can be expected. All such Evaluations should be REVIEWED as soon as the actions have had time to take effect.
IT WILL BE FOUND THAT WHERE YOU HAVE A REAL WHY PEOPLE WILL COOPERATE ALL OVER THE SCENE.
The keynotes are OBSERVE, EVALUATE, PROGRAM, SUPERVISE and REVIEW. The key to evaluation is handling DATA.
.
Reference: Data Series
Reference: Data Series 22—THE WHY IS GOD
.
Having forgotten to keep seed grain for the spring, the farmer starves the following year and when asked WHY he is starving says it is the Gods, that he has sinned or that he failed to make sacrifice. In short, unable to think, he says “The Why is God.”
This condition does not just affect primitives or backward people. All through the most modern organizations you can find “The WHY is God” in other forms.
By believing that it is the fault of other divisions or departments, a staff member does not look into his own scene. “The reason I cannot load the lumber is because the Personnel section will not find and hire people.” It does not seem to occur to this fellow that he is using a WHY which he can’t control so it is not a WHY for his area. It does not move the existing to the ideal scene. Thus it is not a WHY for him. Yet he will use it and go on nattering about it. And the lumber never gets loaded. The real WHY for him more likely would be, “I have no right to hire day laborers. I must obtain this right before my area breaks down totally,” or “My department posts are too specialized. I need to operate on all hands actions on peak loads.”
Survival is very closely tied to logic. If one finds he is sinking into apathy over his inability to get his job done, it is certain that he is operating on self-conceived wrong WHYs in areas that he cannot ever hope to control. And in living any life, most major points of decline can be traced to the person’s operating on whys that do not allow him to improve, his own scene.
Strength and Power in the individual consists of being logical enough to find WHYs he can use to advance his existing scene toward the ideal scene. The Why is NOT God. It lies with YOU and your ability to be logical.
God helps those who help themselves.
.
