6110C10 SHSpec-64  Problems Intensives

     "Supposing that dianetics and scientology did everything they were
supposed to do.  What would your problem have been before you came into it --
your own personal problem?" That is the approach you should use on a PE
course.  Give all the "firsts" of scientology and dianetics; give a very
broad, complete description.  Then ask, "What is the problem that would make
you come into scientology?" This is assuming that everything that was said
about scientology was true.  You restimulate their PTP of long duration, then
ask, "What is your problem?" The problem is now staring them in the face and
in some percentage, they will, for the first time, recognize the source of
some discomfort.  Then give them some data about processing and get them into
the HGC.  That should be the first lecture on a P.E.  course, because it gives
a stable datum, a conditional but desirable stable datum.  On a certain
number, you will produce a startling change.

     There's a new addition to a PC Assessment Sheet.  It gets you a list of
things.  You take the best-reading and run a list of processes on it.
Reassess the list of thinks and repeat the process.  It gets the prior
confusion and handles it with ruds, problems processes, and sec check on the
personnel in the prior confusion.  The first list asks for times the PC's life
changed.  Ask when the changes occurred. Each of them will be handled with the problem that existed just prior, as well as the prior confusion.  The change was a solution.  Get the changes of life-style also.  The "when" doesn't have to be very precise.  Now get the best-reading change and ask, "What problem did you have immediately before that change?" Get him to state the problem, not just a fact.  It should have a a question, a mystery about it, a how, why, or what.  Then just run the problems rud process, until flat e.g. when the somatic that got going quiets down.  It gets at the PTP of long duration, which gives hidden standards.  Run it by the TA.  After it is flat, ask, "What was the confusion in your life just before that?" Then assess the people in that confusion.  The idea of listing and asking for another person in the confusion will put the PC back in the confusion and stop him from skidding forward, and you'll wind up with a
list of personnel.  You sec check the list.  This requires some acumen to mock
up the sec check.  It's really a glorified O/W, and you could just run O/W
except that it has some danger, since it's running against a terminal which
hasn't been assessed.  So it's better to sec check.  If a terminal is not on a
goals line, running it can beef up a case unless run on a sec check.  The sec
check needn't be awfully extensive, though doing it very thoroughly will give
a better result.

     You continue the process with the next best-reading change, etc.  When
all is done, we could say that the person was a release and has no hidden
standards and would do auditing commands.  This fully supplants Routine 1A as
a way to handle problems.

     The reason you are handling hidden standards is not because the
individual has his attention stuck someplace, nor because the PC vias your
auditing commands through it, though these things are true.  You are running
it because to the PC it's an oracle.  He's not really analytically checking
his eyesight every session to see if auditing is making it better.  His
eyesight somatic knows, and that's the only data there is.  Observation and
experience have no bearing on his knowingness.  It's more than a PTP of long
duration of a specialized sort.  It's a pretty vicious proposition.  The PC
does it every command or every session.  If he does it every command, it knows
and he doesn't.  So he has to consult it to find out.  He does it in life all
the time, too, unbeknownst to you.  He judges goodness and badness, truth and
falsity by whether he gets a somatic which comes from some circuit or other.

     A criminal knows right from wrong because a circuit is restimulated or
not.  Therefore the cops are crazy, because the little green light in his
skull lit up when he was about to commit his "crime".  He's baffled when he's
arrested.  He "knows" nobody can tell right from wrong, or he knows by the way
he feels whether he's doing right or wrong.

     The way people get that way is thus:

          1. They are a thetan, as themselves.

          2. They get so invalidated or invalidate others so much that they
             get overwhelmed with their own inval and they pick up a valence.

          3. Somatic overwhelm.  While being the valence, he got a hell of a
             somatic.  An impact is easily substituted for knowingness.

It can also seem to be punishment for some unknown crime, so he's got a
terrible problem: What has he done to be punished for it?  He doesn't know; he
just feels guilty.  Anyway, impact seems like knowingness.  One's own
knowingness as a valence is in validated so he's got an impact knowingness
which he keeps around, which is part of an engram on his goals-terminal chain.  The engram presents a problem because it is not reachable, because it's in the middle of the goals-terminal chain.  Since the PC's own knowingness has been
invalidated, he can only go on being validated in his knowingness as a
circuit.  But he has to be careful because it knows more than he does!
Superstitious peoples, who have very little and have been knocked around
badly, have catalogs of superstitions, which are sort of third dynamic
circuits.  This moves out into a secondary state: the circuit is now audible;
it dictates to him, gives him orders aloud.  This is the final result of a
valence which has been overwhelmed by a somatic, which has been overwhelmed by
another thinkingness, etc.  [See Fig. 4].  It is not an endless number of
valences, but there can be a nearly endless number of hidden standards.

     A real hidden standard is something the PC consults with each command or
each session.  "Consults" is the clue.  The hidden standards key in because of
problems of magnitude or because of prior confusion.  The usual course of
human events is:  The individual went through a lot of trouble and a lot of
confusion.  He couldn't quite figure any part of it out, and it left him hung
with a problem, which he up and solved by changing his life in some way.  He
may get the idea when there's a change, there must have been a problem
before.  There isn't always a problem.  Other-determined changes don't
necessarily have problems before them, but they won't assess on the meter.  He
solves the problem with a hidden standard.

     Where does a circuit come from?  They're different from valences.  A
valence answers the question of who to be or how to be right with a
beingness.  A circuit answers the question, "Without changing a beingness, how
do you know when you're right?" A circuit furnishes information; a valence
furnishes beingness.

     A circuit can step up from furnishing information to furnishing orders,
and then it can step up to furnishing orders below the level of consciousness,
always expressed faintly at least in somatics.  Most people live in haunted
houses.  They think there are other thetans in their bodies because of the
commands of circuits.

     A circuit can be set up easily and isn't a bad thing unless it's out of
his control, forgotten as to authorship, etc., controlling the fellow, with
him taking no responsibility for it.  A thetan can do anything a circuit can
do, and more.  The basic of circuit trouble is setting something up and taking
no responsibility and leaving it on automatic.  If he's done this, he has some
God-Awful problem just before he did it.  Just before he has the problem, he
was in fantastic confusion, and before the confusion, he had fantastic numbers
of withholds from the people in the confusion.  Those conditions must all be
present to get circuit trouble, and you have to pay attention to all of them
to unravel the circuits.

     To get into that state, he'd have to have been pretty active, and to have
started withholding everything from everybody, he was in contact with, about
everything, or about something special.  He's not free to communicate.  Things
start going wrong, since his comm is messed up.  Life got very confused,
eventually became an awful problem.  Then he solved the problem.  If he had
enough overts and withholds, he'd blow, which brought about a change.  The
change is now the tag you can use to get back to all the stuff behind it.

                                    FIGURE 4

                     DWINDLING SPIRAL OF CIRCUIT FORMATION

1. The thetan being as himself.

2. He gets invalidated/overwhelmed as himself.

3. He picks up a valence.

4. The valence gets overwhelmed by a somatic.

5. The valence's knowingness is invalidated.

6. The PC, as the valence, sets up a circuit to use the "impact knowingness"
   of the somatic as a senior source of knowledge, so he can go on being
   validated in his knowingness.  The circuit now does the observing and
   knowing.

7. The circuit becomes audible.

8. The circuit gives orders.

9. The circuit gives orders below the level of consciousness, always expressed
   at least faintly in somatics.

     The point of change is a withdrawal; so is the original O/W.  Both key in
circuits.  [Cf. page 47, where LRH points out that circuits are a substitute
for confront and gives more data about what circuits are used for.] The whole
story is repetitive out-of-communication, with a periscope that looks for him
and tells him.  That's the hidden standard, seen as a circuit.  Experience
must not approach this person, and since auditing is an experience, he never
allows it to approach.  You are trying to audit the person, not the via.  Thus
case gain is slow at best.

     The Problems Intensive hits all this and knocks the circuits out of the
road.  It can be done with imprecise auditing, and it starts with a PC
assessment which is less accusative to the new PC than a sec check
assessment.  He gets familiar with sec checks on a gradient, dealing with
specific people, interesting areas to him.  It makes practically any level of
case processable and can be done by the most self-conscious auditor.

