6608C25 SHSpec-78 The Anti-Social Personality

     [Reference: HCOB 27Sep66 or Introduction to Scientology Ethics, pp. 9-14
"The Anti-Social Personality"]

     LRH has made a complete list of the characteristics of a suppressive
person.  The purpose of ethics is to get technology in.  Ethics doesn't intend
social betterment.  It only intends to ensure case advance by getting
suppressives out of the environment.  An auditor must know about this, so that
he can recognize and handle PTS and suppressive PCs.  This ability to
recognize and handle can prevent an auditor from having loses and invalidating
himself when an SP doesn't make case gain.  When PCs rollercoaster, don't
blame the past auditor or the HGC.  Blame the SP.  A PC who is critical of an
auditor has a missed withhold from that auditor.  The PC who goes on nattering
about the thousands of hours of auditing that he has received, with no gain is
another matter.  You can be too propitiative towards people, whereupon you
can't help them anymore.  You exert no control and don't give effective help.
LRH never owed scientology to anyone.  One of the earliest techniques for
controlling PCs, taken from early dianetics, was to walk out on a PC who
refused to be controlled, with the R-factor that the session would resume when
the PC decided to follow the auditor's directions.  At that point, LRH hadn't
run into failed psychoanalytic cases and people who had been roughed up by
psychotherapy.  There were a lot of these people in the first Foundation.
They were generally PTS or SP's.  These cases are much harder to handle with
auditing than criminals.  The SP on the case may be nowhere near the PTS
individual or the trouble that the PTS causes.

     In early dianetics, a PC who got better and then crashed was said to have
been "on a manic".  A person who is "manic" and then gets depressed, however,
has just run into an SP and has gone PTS.  "There is no such thing as a
'manic'....  It's just that psychiatrists hate people in that condition, and
so they promptly cave them in....  The guy says, 'Wow!  At last I realize that
I can be sane,' and 'Isn't the world wonderful?' [The psychiatrist says,]
'Ohmigawd!  You're in a manic.  We've got to give you eighteen extra shocks,
[or pills,] etc.'"  The psychiatrist says that euphoria is very bad.  this
explains away a person's getting better.  And this will be used by SP's
against you, as an argument against scientology.  The only reason for cave-in
or roller-coaster is an SP!!

     Joe Winter's overt was making a deal with the publisher of Book One to
write a book to get the M.D.'s into dianetics:  A Doctor Looks at Dianetics.
He claimed that dianetics was an art, a a "knack" that couldn't be taught.
This led to a complete squirrel non-standard tech being spread all over the
place, with no results.  "I couldn't hold in tech, because I:

     1.  Didn't have control of it,

 and 2.  Didn't have ethics."

Until ethics was gotten in, in organizations, it was impossible to keep tech
in and working fully, because there was no way to hold the line and no way to
get the suppressives off tech lines.  An auditor who doesn't recognize
ethics-type cases, i.e. SP's and PTS's, is setting himself up for loses and
for eventually quitting auditing.

     There is such a thing as a case who doesn't have a wall there, only a
picture of a wall.  The universe for such a person is a very flimsy mockup,
consisting of dub-in.  You can run contact processes on such a person [CCH's]
and he will come back into contact with the wall that you and I see.
Occasionally, he will be startled, while doing objective processes, to see the
wall getting shaky and disappearing.  You may think that you are making him
OT, but you aren't, because the wall is still there for you.  If he were OT,
it wouldn't be.  He will realize that his mocked-up wall is not the wall that
is there.  This individual doesn't have to be an SP, to have mockups in place
of walls.  For the SP, people -- every one of us -- are mockups, too.  We
aren't there.  God knows what is there, in the Place where we are standing.  A
paranoid is a mild version of this.  An SP is not a paranoid.  A paranoid just
thinks people are against him.  An SP is a person who is "surrounded by
identities which others don't see."  The paranoid may see purely imaginary
people, who aren't there at all.  The SP "creates" his enemies out of the real
"whole cloth" of you and me.  He doesn't see his enemies unless another real
person is there to be turned into a pink alligator, a crazed Indian, or the
priests of the Spanish Inquisition.  What is really there in the SP's universe
is something else, other than people, something very threatening and
dangerous. Yet, mostly, this person looks totally sane.  He doesn't
hallucinate. [He is just delusional.] He is stuck on the track: really stuck.
He has never moved beyond the stuck point on the track.  An SP doesn't make
case gain, because a person needs to have at least a concept of motion on the
time track to get from one end of an engram to the other.  The SP can't run an
engram, because he is stuck in a past moment in time and can't move through
through the successive moments of the engram.  You or I might have had an
incident there for a long time without noticing it.  But the SP has had the
world there for a long time and hasn't noticed it!

     The anti-social personality has been looked at before, but it has never
been fully described in earlier therapies.  We call such a person a
suppressive, because that is a more explicit and accurate term.  These are the
qualities of the suppressive:

     1.  We speaks only in generalities.  He is always talking about "they"
         and "everybody".  This effects PTS's, so they echo it.  But somebody
         told the PTS.  Newspapers speak of "850 Dead on Holiday", but they
         neglect to state that 85 million people were on holiday.  That makes
         it all look sort of dangerous.  Governments, likewise, govern "the
         people" or "the masses", not the individuals who are actually there.
         This is where the sweeping generality comes in.

     2.  He deals in bad news continually and exclusively.  He is critically
         hostile.  He never relays good news, but may twist good news to bad.
         Bad news will be relayed and worsened.  A very SP person is so batty,
         that when he moves up in the world, he makes this the norm.

     3.  He alters any communication.  He never duplicates.  (Cf. the game of
         "Telephone".)

     4.  He doesn't respond to treatment, reform, or psychotherapy.  The
         really bad SP won't come anywhere near an auditing chair.  "The one
         thing this fellow can not do is confront his own mind."  The SP feels
         that he would go totally insane if he had to take one tiny little
         look at his mind.  That is why the SP goes mad at the idea of getting
         people to look at their own minds.  An SP is afraid that if he deals
         with the mind even slightly, those spooks will move slightly.  SP's
         cannot be reasoned with on the subject of the mind.  Your crime is
         that you have almost made them confront something that they don't
         dare confront.  And you have almost exposed them, because they are
         not under good control, and if they love control, they will be put
         away.

     5.  He is surrounded by others in one or another state of ruin and
         cave-in (PTS's).  Around such a person we find associates who are
         cowed, ill, failing, or not succeeding, if not actually driven
         insane.  When you try to treat these associates, they don't keep
         their gains.

     6.  He habitually selects the wrong target.  This is not conscious.  It
         is not just getting mad at the boss because somebody is mad at you.
         It is very reactive, in the SP.  For instance psychiatrists wreck
         people and SP's in governments attack us.  There is a complete
         dissociation.  It is "Bill failed at college, so therefore we should
         go on a diet,"  not "Bill failed at college.  Therefore we shouldn't
         send his brother, Pete." Because the SP attacks the wrong target, he
         doesn't succeed very will on a job.  This is a saving grace.

     7.  He doesn't complete cycles of action.  If he finds out that he has
         completed one, he has to redo it.  He mustn't arrive, and he doesn't
         arrive, because his time sense is loused up.  He doesn't have the
         idea of consecutive events.

     8.  He will often confess to alarming crimes, with no sense of guilt or
         personal responsibility whatsoever.  He doesn't know that there is a
         difference between good and bad behavior.

     9.  He supports and approves of only destructive, downstat, and criminal
         groups and attacks constructive ones.

     10. He approves of destructive actions and disapproves of good actions.
         He says, "It is probably a good thing that we had the war, because
         ... "

     11. Helping others is an activity that drives him
         nearly berserk.  However, activities that destroy in the name of help
         are closely supported.  The idea is to get rid everybody or to make
         them all miserable.

     12. He has a bad sense of property.  He thinks that the
         idea that people own things is a pretense, made up to fool people.
         Nothing is ever really owned, to the SP.

     "Delusions of grandeur" and desires to dominate have nothing to do with
suppressiveness.  The concept of one's own importance does not have any
bearing, here.  An SP may or may not have the feeling of being very important,
as may a non-SP.  There is nothing wrong with dominance.  This is not the same
as suppression.  It is what a person does with dominance that counts.

     An auditor's skill depends on his recognition of the situation in which
he finds himself auditing.  When you manage to isolate a series of
characteristics that give you a certain expectancy, knowledge of this data
becomes valuable.  If you can see several characteristics on an SP in a
person, you can predict the rest and unload.  This is an ethics case.  An
auditor should know that there could be more than one SP on the case.  He
should locate the other SP(s), if the first S and D doesn't get permanent
results, even though it was well done.  You could do a successful S and D and,
at a much later date, the PC could find another SP and roller-coaster from
that.

