Social psychology is based on the ABCs of affect, behavior, and cognition. In order to effectively maintain and enhance our own lives through successful interaction with others, we rely on these three basic and interrelated human capacities:
ref. https://positivepsychology.com/albert-ellis-abc-model-rebt-cbt/
In Scientology this reads A, R and C.
There is no such thing. The idea of an actual GPM line plot is based on the belief that a goal always leads to its opposition. There ain’t such a thing as ‘earlier goals being dramatized’, there is only one particular goal being pursued in the present time. Earlier goals may exist as memory, but not as actualization. There may be opposition but not necessarily from the same being. There are actual goals and the possible resistance to those from other beings with goals. There are three scenarios: goals supporting other goals, goals countering other goals and goals not affecting other goals.
The subject of goals is in fact the same subject as the ‘dynamic principle of existence’ or the basic motivation of a being. The basic motivation of a being was precisely identified by Nietzsche, it is the Will to Power [refer ethics conditions] and this may be the one goal that all beings have in common, regardless of the individualized versions of this basic goal.
I think Filbert was the first scientologist to double the number of dynamics up to 16 dynamics way beyond the eighth dynamic of infinity. These so called upper dynamics are simply variations or parts of the seventh or spiritual dynamic. As LRH said anything spiritual with or without identity would come under the heading of the seventh dynamic. The highest dynamic in Scientology is a boundary called infinity which nothing can surpass. Higher dynamics are mentioned en passant and jocularly as in the ninth dynamic: the buck; these were never part of the Scientology system of dynamics.
Thus what Filbert calls dynamics 9 -16 – aestetics, ethics, decency, truth, awareness, individuality, coexistence and theta that is not being – all belong to the seventh dynamic.
His idea was that the upper dynamics rule and produce the junior dynamics. ‘Theta that is not being’ as the highest dynamic would imply that the universe has arisen out of non-existence, now renamed theta, which is impossible.
“Understand: To have a clear and true idea or conception, or full and exact knowledge, of something. In general it may be said that understand refers to the result of a mental process or processes (a clear and exact idea or notion, or full knowledge).”
HCO BULLETIN OF 7 SEPTEMBER 1974 SUPERLITERACY AND THE CLEARED WORD
First of all note that the definition of ARC or Communication does not include any thought process.
ARC (loosely defined) is a transfer of an impulse or particle – with some attendant affinity and reality (agreement) – from one point in space to another which produces whatever experience corresponds to that impact.
It will always be a particular experience. In order to become an understanding it would have to be generalized or given a position in a larger more universal context or it will never add up to understanding. Concepts which are key to understanding, imply universals and thought processes.
In other words understanding will need reason, logic and thought (mathematics) to manifest.
The above gives rise to two different triads:
Affinity+Reality (agreement)+Communication = EXPERIENCE
Reason+Logic+Thought (Mathematics) = UNDERSTANDING
This must be corrected in scientology, if it is to last at all. Hubbard was too much married to empiricism which is shown by the above. One can also see that in his writing on ‘Logics’ as was pointed out about a year ago in the book ‘Critique of Pure Scientology’.
Lafayette states that a static is an energy production and conversion unit capable of manifesting electromagnetic phenomena without physical characteristics.
He is obviously ignoring the fact that a static is defined as having no motion, no energy, no wavelength. There are however no electromagnetic phenomena without wavelength. This is doubly contradictory.
He could save the day by using the term ‘theta motor’ instead of static as I have suggested earlier. https://xscn.mgtconcepts.com/?p=667 If it wasn’t for the crappy formulation there might even be some truth in what he is saying.
Being there, as in TR 0, does not mean one should stop thinking. Thinking is not doing something. Doing is what is happening through directed energy in the physical realm. On the org bd, BE is Div 7, 1 and 2, DO is 3 and 4, and HAVE is 5 and 6.
Cogito ergo sum. I think therefore I am. It does not mean that I am doing anything. Mind is not in the material world, its sole activity is thinking. Thinking is part of its beingness. The Cartesian reverse would be I think not, so am not.
Hubbard said Reality is agreed upon Isness. Isness is an apparency, not actual. [Actual means: Existing in reality and not potential, possible, simulated, or false.] In the East such isness is called Maya.
Vinaire says Reality = IS-NESS. Reality (is-ness, maya) improves as alter-isness is removed. That is the whole idea of handling anomalies. Resolving anomalies amounts to removing alter-is-ness. If one removes all alter-is-ness from reality one gets as-is-ness and reality disappears. ref. Axiom 11.
Hegel said “The rational is real, and the real is rational”. If that is so then Reality=Reason=Theta.
Who is right?
Theta is reason. A reason is the thought behind whatever it is the reason for. Everything that exists is or has an underlying thought or reason. “In the beginning and forever is the decision and the decision is TO BE.” LRH
Existence was preceded by a decision, which is a type of thought. Or we could say that the reason for existence was the decision. Therefore one can validly state that reason is the driving force or dynamic principle of existence.
Life = Theta = Static = Thought = Dynamic
THE DYNAMIC PRINCIPLE OF EXISTENCE IS REASON
It is not survival, as many things exist but don’t survive. But everything that exists has a cause and a reason why it is thus and not otherwise.