Suppressive Person Defense League

Main navigation

You are here: Home / Archives for overts and withholds

overts and withholds

by Leave a Comment

HCOB: Rock Slams and Rock Slammers

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 1 NOVEMBER 1974RA
REVISED 5 SEPTEMBER 1978
Remimeo
Expanded Dianetics Specialists
Cl IVs and Above
C/Ses
Qual
HCO Dept 3 Hats
PTS/SP Detection Course

ROCK SLAMS AND ROCK SLAMMERS

R/Ses

An R/S or rock slam is defined as the crazy, irregular, left-right slashing motion of the needle on the E-Meter dial. R/Ses repeat left and right slashes unevenly and savagely, faster than the eye easily follows. The needle is frantic. The width of an R/S depends largely on sensitivity setting. It goes from one-fourth inch to whole dial. But it slams back and forth. It is actually quite startling to see. IT IS VERY DIFFERENT FROM OTHER METER PHENOMENA.

[…]

ROCK SLAMMERS

In a normal group of 400, the actual percentage of R/Sers is low. It’s about 8 in 400, or 2-2 ½ percent. Those figures should seem familiar. They are the same percentage for SPs. And that gives you a clue to the identification of an R/Ser.

Where requirements for Scientology or SO orgs have been established for R/Ses, they apply to the 2-2 ½ percent of real R/Sers as these are high risks for staff purposes.

These people can of course be salvaged as pcs using Expanded Dianetics. Letting them on staff could be disasterous, however.

A handled R/Ser can be expected to eventually wind up in the same category as a cleared cannibal. His experiential track is too educated in evil and too uneducated in anything else. So even when cleaned up will need a lot of living.

R/Sers are also very expensive people to keep around. They waste the available resources and produce overt products. They cost a fortune in waste, repairs, lost business. They also cost a heartbreaking number of damaged people.

[…]

LIST ONE R/Ser

There are, for our purposes, two kinds of R/Sers. (a) Those who R/S on subjects not connected with Scientology and (b) those who R/S on subjects connected to Scientology. The latter is a “List One R/Ser” and it is of great importance to us that they be located and moved off lines when they are part of staffs as their intent is solely to destroy us whatever else they say: Their long-run actions will prove it.

The definition of a List One R/Ser is anyone who has R/Sed on List One1

[…]

Where there is any doubt as to the validity of a List One R/S, a verification should be done. The procedure is to vigorously sec check the pc on the subject of the reported List One R/S. This Sec Check must be done by an auditor who knows R/Ses and can make lists read and pull W/Hs connected with R/S.

[…]

Where a pc R/Ses, he will have evil purposes and be on a succumb as a result. R/Ses indicate an area of psychosis which will ruin the pc’s life if allowed to go unhandled.

[…]

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Hubbard, L. R. (1974, 1 November). Rock Slams and Rock Slammers (Hubbard Communications Office Bulletin).  The Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology (1991 ed., Vol. X, pp. 656-659). Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.

Notes

by Leave a Comment

HCOB: Psychosis, More About

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 9 MAY 19771; 2

Issue II

Remimeo
Expanded Dianetics Auditors
C/Ses

Expanded Dianetics Series 24

PSYCHOSIS, MORE ABOUT

(Excerpted from HCOB 17 June 71, which is a Flag-only bulletin.)

All aberration is to a greater or lesser degree nonsurvival.

To be rid of major aberrations is to have a new life.

To understand this one must understand the most severe aberration which is psychosis.

The actual basis of all psychosis is motive. It is NOT competence or incompetence.

Below all psychotic conduct lies an evil purpose.

Because psychiatry and psychology did not have this single technical fact they defined psychosis as “incompetence,” had the wrong target and so could not and never did understand psychosis and were thereby led into atrocities such as shocks and brain surgery and, in the country where these subjects originated (Germany), slaughtered 300,000 insane in gas chambers some time before Hitler came to power.

A true psychotic can be brilliant or stupid, competent or incompetent. It is his general motive or purpose that determines whether or not he is insane or sane.

Famous psychotics like Napoleon, Ivan the Terrible, Stalin and Hitler were all quite brilliant yet wound up destroying everything in sight including their own people.

They had a destructive basic purpose. Every psychotic has one. It is usually covert, hidden, but in full play against his unsuspecting friends.

The sole difference in motive is whether it is destructive or constructive.

Everyone has a basic purpose. The psychotic has a destructive one.

The test of a personality, then, is whether the result of a person’s activity is destructive or constructive.

Man is basically good. When he finds he is being too destructive he recognizes he is bad for others and seeks to leave. He will also try to become less powerful, ill or to kill himself.

The progress of psychosis then begins with a belief something is evil. This is followed with an effort to stop it. This stop becomes general. A basic purpose is then formed which contains an evil intent.

The being then goes on from disaster to disaster, seeking overtly or covertly to destroy everything around him.

At a guess about 15 percent to 25 percent of living human beings are psychotic and bring covert disaster to those around them and themselves.

The evil purpose is expressed by committing harmful acts and withholding them.

Ordinary Overt/Withhold Processes, as in Grade II Expanded, can handle this condition providing the person can be audited and providing the evil purpose is also brought to view.

About one third of the psychotics handled in this way recover their sanity fully and lead constructive decent lives. Two thirds are either so far gone, irresponsible or hard to audit that they improve but are of little use.

Those already subjected to the brutalities of psychiatric “treatment” or psychological “counseling” are the most difficult.

Those who have been on drugs, particularly LSD 25 as developed by psychiatry “so their nurses would be able to experience what being insane feels like” around 1950, are very difficult cases.

L. Ron Hubbard
Founder

Notes

by Leave a Comment

HCOB: Recurring Withholds And Overts

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 17 APRIL 1977R1
REVISED 16 NOVEMBER 1989

Remimeo
Tech Divs
Qual Divs
Auditors
C/Ses

RECURRING WITHHOLDS AND OVERTS

Refs:
Tape: 6211C01 THE MISSED MISSED WITHHOLD
HCOB 11 Sept. 68 FALSE READS
HCO PL 7 Apr. 70RE Rev. 27.4.89 GREEN FORM
HCOB 15 Nov. 78 DATING AND LOCATING
HCOB 30 Nov. 78R Rev. 10.11.87 CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE
HCOB 23 July 80R Rev. 26.7.86 CONFESSIONAL REPAIR LIST-LCRE

The definition of a recurring withhold or overt is one that keeps coming up, repeats again or shows up again. It is simply a withhold or overt that has already been gotten off and comes up again as an answer to an apparent reading withhold or overt question.

HOW WITHHOLDS OR OVERTS CAN RECUR

A withhold or overt that recurs can result from a situation like this: A case can get off a tremendous overt to an auditor who didn’t accept the overt, and then in another session mention it to another auditor who thinks he saw a read when he didn’t or pretends he saw a read. The pc may now believe he cannot get rid of the overt because it is still “reading.”

The pc may become exasperated at again having to get off such an overt or withhold. He may become upset, seem resigned or protest at the prospect of having to again handle a recurring overt or withhold.

The other reason a withhold or overt can recur is when there is an unknown-to-the-pc incident or piece of incident at the bottom of a chain. An unknown incident can make a chain of incidents react on the needle. This can include the missed withhold aspect of someone having nearly found out about it.

A pc continues to feel uncomfortable about a withhold or overt from which the bottom has not been pulled. For instance, a pc tells Auditor A: “I kissed a boy last week.” Later, she tells Auditor B: “I kissed a boy last week.” Later still she tells Auditor C: “I kissed a boy last week.” That is a recurring withhold. It means that neither Auditor A, Auditor B nor Auditor C got the unknown out of that withhold or its chain.

HANDLINGS

There are several methods of handling recurring withholds and overts, depending on the manifestations seen in the pc:

1. If a pc gets upset with a withhold being demanded that he has already gotten off and he gets into protest about it, there is obviously a false read as the pc is getting off overts already gotten off:

HANDLING: Check for false reads on overts by asking the pc what overt he or she has gotten off more than once and tracing it back with the pc to what auditor or person said something read when it didn’t. One would clean all these up to F/N. Protest, Invalidate and Suppress can be checked to clean up a false read. (Ref: HCOB 11 Sept. 68, FALSE READS)

If the above doesn’t resolve the recurring overt or withhold, another handling can be done:

HANDLING: Ask the pc, “Who said or seemed to infer something read when it didn’t?” Then this would be dated to blow and located to blow. (Ref: HCOB 11 Sept. 68, FALSE READS; HCOB 15 Nov. 78, DATING AND LOCATING)

2. If the situation occurs where a pc mentions he felt his overt wasn’t accepted:

HANDLING: Find out who wouldn’t accept it, E/S to F/N. (Ref: HCO PL 7 Apr. 70RE, GREEN FORM)

3. If the pc has been invalidated for getting it off:

HANDLING: Find out who invalidated the pc for getting off overts or withholds, E/S to F/N. (Note any terminals for later handling on the PTS RD.)

4. If the pc has been punished for getting it off:

HANDLING: Find out who punished the pc for getting off overts and withholds, E/S to F/N.

5. If none of the above manifestations of false reads are present when a withhold or overt recurs, the auditor treats it on the basis that there is something unknown about the incident or its chain and proceeds to do the following:

HANDLING: Pull all of the withhold or overt (including getting who missed it) and, if needed, get the earlier-similar withhold or overt and take the chain down to basic and F/N. (Ref: HCOB 30 Nov. 78R, CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE)

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Revision assisted by LRH Technical Research and Compilations

Hubbard, L. R. (1977, 17 April). Recurring Withholds And Overts. Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology (1991 ed., Vol XI, pp. 49-50). Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.

Notes

  1. Document studied on the Hubbard Senior Security Checker Course. ↩

by Leave a Comment

HCOB: Formulating Confessional Questions

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 1 MARCH 19771
Issue III

Remimeo
Confessional Auditors
Academy
Grad V
SHSBC

FORMULATING CONFESSIONAL QUESTIONS

(Compiled from LRH taped lecture “Teaching the
Field Sec Checks,” SHSBC 6109C26 SH Spec 58.)

Withholds don’t add up to withholds. They add up to overts, they add up to secrecies, they add up to individuations, they add up to games conditions, they add up to a lot more things than O/W.

Although we carelessly call them withholds, we’re asking a person to straighten out their interpersonal relationships with another terminal.

Our normal Confessional is addressed to the individual versus the society or his family.

It’s what people would consider reprehensible that makes a withhold.

In a Catholic society, not having kept Mass would be a reprehensible action. In a non-Catholic society, nobody would think twice about it. So, most of our Confessionals are aimed at transgressions against the mores of the group. That is the basic center line of the Confessional.

You can have a special mores between the son and the mother, a special mores between the husband and the wife, just as you have a special mores, of course, between the auditor and the preclear.

It’s a moral code that you are processing in one way or the other.

You are straightening out somebody on a moral code, the “Now I’m supposed to’s.” They’ve transgressed on a series of “Now I’m supposed to’s.” Having so transgressed, they are now individuated. If their individuation is too obsessive, they snap in and become the terminal. All of these cycles exist around the idea of the transgression against the “Now I’m supposed to’s.” That is what a Confessional clears up and that is all it clears up. It’s a great deal more than a withhold.

You would go straight to a person’s handling of masses and changes of space. On lacking a clue in that direction, you would go into his most confused motional areas (not e-motional).

This fellow has been a recluse ever since he was twenty. He has not done anything since he was twenty. He has never been anyplace since he was twenty. His hidden standard is he would “get about more.” Could he find himself getting about more, he would know that Scientology was working. You find what area he was in before he was twenty. Staying in the house is a cure for something. So you put him on an E-Meter. You can’t find areas of moving heavy masses or changes in spaces before he was twenty because he wasn’t working. It probably lies in the zone of, maybe, he was in the service? Maybe he was in a boarding school? So all of a sudden you hit the jackpot and you find an area of considerable activity. You’re looking for the area of considerable activity which lies prior to the difficulty. Then you run a Confessional on that area of activity.

You trace it back to boarding school. There’s one boarding school that he absolutely detests, he suddenly remembers. That’s what you do the Confessional on. Every question you ask has to do with this boarding school. Just add up the factors. How many things can go on in a boarding school? How many people are present? What is there in a boarding school? There are students, boys, instructors, coaches, headmasters, buildings, athletic equipment, and probably transport from there to home, etc.

Find out all the types of crimes that he migh t have been able to commit against these items. You can dream up a whole form.

One of the ways of doing it is taking an existing Confessional form and just moving it over to the zone of the school. That is not as satisfactory as just putting down all the things he really did in this school that he is never going to tell anybody.

It inevitably is going to be an area of tight mores. He has cut up against those mores, so has individuated himself against the school, so he cannot as-is any part of the track. He’s trapped in that particular zone and activity.

Any set of cut sensory perception will operate as overt bait. Forget is a version of not know. So that any sensory perceptive cut off is an effort not to know and you have a target.

Take everything that you’ve worked up to right there and now do a Confessional on it. Eventually you’ll get a “What do you know!” He’s too in the thing to see it. You can see it because you’re outside of it.

You write up every noun you could possibly think of on the subject of the zone or dynamic that he is having difficulty with and which he fails to cognite on in any way shape or form. You can immediately assume that if he doesn’t cognite on that zone or area, that he’s really pinned down and that he has withholds from you and from the area on the subject of the area that not even he knows.

A cognition is totally dependent upon the freedom to know. Overts and withholds are dedicated to another thing, these are dedicated to not knowingness. So if the person doesn’t cognite, you can immediately assume that he has a large area of not knowingness on the subject that he doesn’t even suspect. You as an outsider to his case can suspect where this fellow is having trouble. You dream up a Confessional to match it. The formula for making up a Confessional is just make up a list of all the items you can think of which have anything to do with that target.

Let’s say his family; he’s always had family trouble. You can get this from a pc’s PTPs. If you look at the type of PTP that the pc has, you’ll know that it is a present time problem of long duration. If it adds up to three or four times in a row of PTPs with his family, it must be a problem of long duration. The hottest way to get rid of that particular zone is to do a Confessional on it. Again, the way to do a Confessional, is to make a list of all the nouns and all the doingnesses which you can think of and just ask the person if he has overts against any of them; has he done anything to, has he interfered with anything about, e.g. “Have you ever interfered with schooling,” “Have
you ever done anything to schooling,” “Have you ever prevented schooling.”

It’s little by little that this cognition will take place. It’s not all going to take place in one bang.

In the long run it will be a bang, but the bang only took place because you took the pebbles off the top. When you’ve finally got the thing uncovered—he can look at it and blow it.

This is the rule: ANY ZONE OR ACTIVITY WITH WHICH A PERSON IS HAVING DIFFICULTY IN LIFE OR HAS HAD DIFFICULTY WITH IN LIFE IS A FRUITFUL AREA FOR A CONFESSIONAL.

You will find out every time, he’s got withholds in that zone or area.

One of the indicators of that is a present time problem. Therefore you know it’s a problem of long duration. Three problems of short duration equals one problem of long duration. It’s a good detector mechanism.

THE RULE IN CONFESSIONALS IS BREAK THE PROBLEM DOWN TO ITS MOST FUNDAMENTAL EXPRESSION.

Then write down those nouns associated with it and those basic doingnesses associated with the fundamental expression and then just phrase your Confessional questions on the basis “Have you ever . . . ?” and any other verb you want to put in. “Have you ever done anything to . . . ?” “Have you ever prevented . . . ?”

You don’t have to be fancy as the needle’s going to fall every time you come close to it.

Any area where a person is having difficulty in, he is stupid in. Stupidity is not knowingness. This is through overts. But the overt has to be hidden, so it must be an overt that is withheld.

So, these withholds then add up to stupidity and he of course, has trouble.

There isn’t anything complicated in it at all.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Assisted by Training and Services Aide

Hubbard, L. R. (1977, 1 March). Formulating Confessional Questions. Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology (1991 ed., Vol. XI. pp. 37-9). Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.

Notes

  1. Document studied on the Hubbard Senior Security Checker Course. ↩

by Leave a Comment

HCOPL: Product-Org Officer System Want Your Product

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 AUGUST 19761
Issue II

Remimeo
All Execs
All Purchasers

Admin Know-How Series 34
Establishment Officer Series 32

PRODUCT-ORG OFFICER SYSTEM

WANT YOUR PRODUCT

A product officer has to name, WANT and get his product.

Where no real or valuable production is occurring, one has to ask the question, does the product officer really WANT the product he is demanding? And does the staff member or members he is dealing with WANT the product?

The reason that a psychotic or otherwise evilly-intentioned person cannot achieve anything as a product officer or staff member is that he does NOT want the product to occur. The intentions of psychos are aimed at destruction and not at creation.

Such persons may SAY they want the product but this is just “PR” and a cover for their real activities.

People who are PTS (potential trouble sources by reason of connections with people antagonistic to what they are doing in life) are all too likely to slide into the valence of the antagonistic person who definitely would NOT want the product.

Thus, in an org run by or overloaded with destructive persons or PTS persons, you see a very low level of production if you see any at all. And the production is likely to be what is called “an overt product,” meaning a bad one that will not be accepted or cannot be traded or exchanged and has more waste and liability connected with it than it has value.

One has to actually WANT the product he is asking for or is trying to produce.

There may be many reasons he does not, none of which are necessarily connected with being psycho. But if it is a creative and valuable product and assists his and the survival of others and he still does not want it, then one should look for PTSness or maybe even a bit of psychosis. And at the least, some withholds.

One does not have to be in a passionate, mystic daze about wanting the product.

But one shouldn’t be moving mountains in the road of a guy trying to carry some lumber to the house site either.

The question of WANT the product has to be included in any examination of reasons why a person or an org isn’t producing.

L. Ron Hubbard
Founder

Notes

  1. Document studied on the How to Confront and Shatter Suppression PTS/SP Course. (2001 ed.) ↩

by Leave a Comment

HCOB: The Continuous Missed W/H and Continuous Overt with Data on Degraded Beings and False PTS Conditions

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 15 DECEMBER 19731; 2

Remimeo
All Levels
Add Level II Checksheet
Ethics Officers
Masters-at-Arms
C/Ses

THE CONTINUOUS MISSED W/H AND CONTINUOUS OVERT WITH DATA ON DEGRADED BEINGS AND FALSE PTS CONDITIONS

Refs:

Tape List and HCO B List of Academy Level II, concerning withholds and overts
HCOB 22 Mar. 67 II ALTER-IS AND DEGRADED BEINGS

There are two special cases of withholds and overts. They do not occur in all cases by a long ways. But they do occur on a few cases. These are CONTINUOUS MISSED WITHHOLDS and CONTINUOUS OVERTS.

This is not quite the same as THE CONTINUING OVERT ACT, HCOB 29 Sept. 65 II. In that type the person is repeating overt acts against something usually named.

THE CONTINUOUS MISSED W/H

A continuous missed withhold occurs when a person feels some way and anyone who sees him misses it.

Example: A doctor feels very unconfident of his skill. Every patient who sees him misses the fact that he is not confident.

This reacts as a missed withhold.

It is of course based upon some bad incident that destroyed his confidence (usually of an engramic intensity).

But as the person actively withholds this, then those seeing him miss the withhold.

This could work in thousands of variations. A woman feels continuous disdain for her child but withholds it. The child therefore continuously misses a withhold. All the phenomena of the missed w/h would continuously react against the child.

Probably all dishonest social conduct brings about a Continuous missed withhold. The politician who hates people, the minister who no longer believes in God, the mechanic who privately believes he is a jinx on machinery, these all then set up the phenomena of missed withholds on themselves and can  dramatize it in their conduct.

THE CONTINUOUS OVERT

A person who believes he is harmful to others may also believe that many of his common ordinary actions are harmful.

He may feel he is committing a continuous overt on others.

Example: A clothing model believes she is committing a fraud on older women by displaying clothing to them in which they will look poorly. In her estimation this is a continuous overt act. Of course all older women miss it on her.

Appearance, just being alive, can be considered by some as an overt.

Missed withhold phenomena will result.

DEGRADED BEINGS

The continuous withhold and continuous overt are probably a basis of feeling degraded.

Degraded beings, as described in ALTER-IS AND DEGRADED BEINGS, HCOB 22 Mar. 67 II, are that way at least in part because they have some continuous missed withhold or a fancied continuous overt act.

This makes them feel degraded and act that way.

HANDLING

One can add to any program a check for a continuous missed withhold or continuous overt as an additional version of rudiments.

A master question, which could be broken down into three lists which would have to be done by the laws of L&N, would be, “When anyone looks at you what feeling (action, attitude) of yours do they miss?” Then, “When was it missed?” “Who missed it?” and “What did he do that made you believe it had been missed?”

Another approach, less dangerous in that lists aren’t made, would be:

For continuous missed withhold the question could be, “Is there some way you feel that others don’t realize?” And with 2wc uncover it. Then ask, “Who misses this?” with answer, followed by, “When has someone missed it?” with E/S to an earlier time. Followed by, “What did he (or she) do that made you think he (or she) knew?” This will key it out and can change behavior.

For continuous overt act it would be, “Is there something you do that others do not know about?” With 2wc to cover it and get what it is. Then ask, “Who has not found out about it?” with an answer. And then, “When did someone almost find out?”

“What did he (or she) do that made you think he (or she) knew?”

Each of the above questions should be F/Ned.

MOTION

People who have continuous withholds or overts tend to be very slow, flubby and impositive. They have to be very careful. And they make mistakes. Slowness or robotness are keys to the presence of continuous missed withholds or overts.

PTS

Quite often a case is FALSELY LABELED PTS when in fact it is really a matter of continuous missed withholds and continuous overts.

When a “PTS” person does not respond to PTS handling easily then you know you are dealing with continuous missed withholds and/or continuous overts.

SUMMARY

These conditions are not present in all cases. When they are you have a degraded being. When a “PTS” person does not respond to PTS handling, try continuous missed withholds and continuous overts. You can prevent blows, handle much HE and R and change character in this way.

L. Ron Hubbard
Founder

Notes