HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 8 JUNE 19841
False Purpose RD
Auditors and C/Ses
All Sec Checkers
False Purpose RD
False Purpose Rundown Series 4
(Modifies: HCOB 30 Nov. 78, CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE)
HCOB 21 Jan. 60 JUSTIFICATION
HCOB 7 July 64 JUSTIFICATIONS
HCOB 8 July 64 MORE JUSTIFICATIONS
Tape: 6406C09 “The Cycle of Action, Its Interpretation on the E-Meter”
Tape: 6406C16 “Communication, Overts and Responsibility”
One of the tools of the successful auditor is the technique of getting off the pc’s justifications when pulling overts and withholds. When this tech has fallen out of use, auditing has been less effective. Therefore, in auditing the False Purpose RD it is mandatory that on each overt pulled the pc’s justifications of that overt must be cleared.
Additionally, a step is added to Sec Checking procedure of getting the pc’s justifications off on each overt that is found.
Where the pc is justifying, he is in a nonconfront of his own causation. By justifying he is lessening the severity of the overt, and as long as he has an overt justified, he hasn’t taken responsibility for it and it will still be charged. Thus, pulling off the pc’s justifications is invaluable in raising his cause and responsibility level.
Justifications are asked for after the time, place, form and event of the overt have been gotten and before asking for “who missed it” and E/S.
The pc’s justifications can be gotten by asking, “Have you justified that overt?” or “Why wasn’t that an overt?” getting that answered and asking for any more justifications until all are gotten. Quite often they will come off in a torrent, to the great relief of the pc.
Example: Auditor is running the Confessional question, “Have you ever stolen an apple?” After getting the pc to answer and give the what, when and so forth of the overt, the auditor asks:
Auditor: “Have you justified that overt?”
Pc: “Yes, I decided it was okay to steal the apples because I was hungry.”
Auditor: “Thank you. How else did you justify it?”
Pc: “Well, the store had so many apples in stock that I knew it wouldn’t hurt them to lose a few . . . and after all, they’ve overcharged me before, so they actually sort of owed it to me, and I always shop there so they’re still making plenty of money from me.”
Auditor: “Okay. How else did you justify it?”
Pc: “That covers it. Boy, I really had that one loaded up with reasons for its being all right!”
Auditor: “Thanks very much. Who missed it?” (Auditor continues on with the “missed” step and then, if no EP, goes E/S on the Sec Check question.)
This HCOB in no way changes or replaces the “Overt-Justification” process which is run as part of Expanded Grade IV.
The L Rundowns are audited exactly per the Class X, XI and XII materials and are not added to or modified in any way by this HCOB.
This is quite a powerful bit of tech. Its application can make all the difference in cleaning up an overt.
L. RON HUBBARD
Hubbard, L. R. (1984, 8 June). Clearing Justifications. The Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology. (1991 ed., Vol. VI, p. 572-3.). Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.