The Stable Datum

[mearvk]

Now there's a lot of poorly understood data in the world and in Scientology. When you do understand a concept and that concept can be used to better one's life we are talking about a stable datum. Now that's really the layman's definition but that's where we should be aiming. Stable data help you understand some area of life, work, etc., via an (often) simple mechanical process. The subject is intimately tied to Scientology and winningness in general. This is bedrock technology. We can go lower but only by an order of magnitude and then it really becomes more about correct intuition (a kind of knowingness) and less about situational understandingness. Ok? My purpose here is to reinforce and stabilize your understanding of what is meant by stable data so that you can begin to work with this datum should you so choose. This is probably a subject that deserves its own 50 to 100 cassette lecture set from the Church of Scientology. If you've made it this far, good. Let's look quick at the technical dictionary definitions so we can have a basis to improve our understanding further.

Scientology technical dictionary definition:

Stable datum:

1. until one selects one datum, one factor, one particular in a confusion of particles, the confusion continues for the remainder. (POW p. 23)
2. any body of knowledge is built from one datum. That is its stable datum. Invalidate it and the entire body of knowledge falls apart. A stable datum does not have to be the correct one. It is simply the one that keeps things from being in a confusion an one which others are aligned. (POW, p. 24)
3. a datum which keeps things from being in a confusion and around which other data align (NSOL, p. 66)

Some quick observations about the above definitions:

a. Any body of knowledge may be built from one datum or it may be built from multiple data. Scientology has logics, axioms and Qs which are all more numerous than one.
b. A stable data lessens confusion but may not eliminate it. Just because you understand one aspect of your life doesn't mean the rest of your life is necessarily now magically less chaotic.
c. Note that a stable datum doesn't even need to be correct.
d. The term "confusion" isn't sufficient here. What we mean is chaos, adversity, unhappiness, inability, etc. in addition of course to simple confusion. In other words, subjectively, the person may not be experiencing confusion but some other thing. Technically stable data serve to better understanding which isn't always opposed to confusion. Worth noting probably.

These definitions are not sufficient, really, not least because they do not stress the importance of the subject, but because they simply do not really breathe life into such concepts as data alignment, mechanics, or the suppositional groundwork sitting beneath this subject. Ok? So consider again if these definitions are sufficient for you to make your own life better. It would be weird indeed to have poor definitions for stable data in a subject designed to really to communicate almost entirely the correct stable data. That probably can't be overstressed, but draw your own conclusions.

Let's take a quick moment to ice our confusion and regain our perspective by giving our minds a simple and correct definition from which to work. Ok? The stable datum is the thing you understand which you then feel better about things because you know you do understand them better. That is the stable datum. It can be as mechanical as buying your boss coffee each morning as a way to convey respect because it is recognized as a simple right action. The stable datum is, let us posit, understanding the value of right action. The action coming out of it is buying the coffee. Ok?

So there's really probably a very nice science sitting about 100 pages into this subject. You do have stable data already in your life. The wife comes home angry and you know you'll be cooking dinner and perhaps you draw her a bath and put on some music. Beneath that action is a supposition which is a stable datum. In recognizing that you are using them, how you are using them, when you are using them, if you are using them correctly, etc. you will have at least taken back some control of your own processes and that I think is close enough to the Scientology definition of a win.

The subject stable datum is and get this as critical one potential solution to the experience we call life. The correct stable data can be the difference between unlimited happiness and being stuck in the mud. When you study a subject do be mindful of what stable data it is proposing for which problems and see if they are workable. Hopefully you're feeling better after reading this. Apply this where you can it's wonderful stuff but don't, please, use it to avoid correct handling where it is due. And please don't use it as a mechanism of control outside of where correct senior stable data would naturally allow. Ok?

Good luck and safe and happy weekend. Thanks to Ron for all his good will and effort.

 

[lotus]

The stable datum is one of the most phallacious concept thaught in $cientology.

It sits on false premise that a soul\being is in need of making something stable - static - unchanging to get in control of his life.

But the truth is there is nothing in this world that is permanent and unchanging - nothing.

Attempting to make things stable is a desperate frantic need of the ego

Anyone who open his mind to something else tha $cientology, who read true great renowned master in many sciences knows this. His minds is open to observation and learning. Anyone who take sometime alone, in silence, and observe the world around know this by first hand knowledge.

Any person who attained some bits of wisdom , succeded in it with giving up at attempt to control and keep things as they are. They get much freedom when they acknowledge the fact the environment is changing every and each second, they change.
Most of them accept they will make food for worms and compost for trees when they die.
It's the wheel of life , the wheel of transformation.

Sorry but your concept of stable datum is a psychotic concept for the ego to grasp the mooving particules in this world and stop it - it has been thaught to you by a man who tried to do that all his life and lost his mind.

The ''most stable'' elements LRH had in his life, like his wife and children, he destroyed it. He wanted a static control over the world but didn't even succed to control his frantic thaughts imagination, cruely, lies, fraud need for drugs, pervert people...

The best way to control people, is to lie to them you guru ever said....
In $cientology, you most stable datum will become auditing.....need for auditing....auditing for your freedom...auditing to save the planet...auditing to be happy...and in these days, it becomes the need of Ideal Morgue as a stable datum.
because the dear leaders of such cult thing they need $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ as a stable datum.

* If you ever when into a psyciatric institution you will see many people who desperately attempt to grasp stable datum . Unfortunately it is very much difficult sometimes to work a way they can tolerate some changing of things , people, and motion.

 

[mearvk]

[video=youtube;wOwblaKmyVw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOwblaKmyVw[/video]

 

[lotus]

[video=youtube_share;Ls6n1TWeEQ4]http://youtu.be/Ls6n1TWeEQ4[/video]​

 

[Bill]

<never mind>

 

[lotus]

Let's take a quick moment to ice our confusion and regain our perspective by giving our minds a simple and correct definition from which to work..

LRH get out of this body!

 

[F.Bullbait]

It's just an anchor point.

 

[lotus]

DOCTRINE OF THE STABLE DATUM, ​

a confusing motion can be understood by conceiving one thing to be motionless. Until one selects one datum, one factor, one particular in a confusion of particles, the confusion continues. The one thing selected and used becomes the stable datum for the remainder. (POW, pp. 23-24)
L ron Hubbard

Scientology technical dictionary definition:

Stable datum:

1. until one selects one datum, one factor, one particular in a confusion of particles, the confusion continues for the remainder. (POW p. 23)
2. any body of knowledge is built from one datum. That is its stable datum. Invalidate it and the entire body of knowledge falls apart. A stable datum does not have to be the correct one. It is simply the one that keeps things from being in a confusion an one which others are aligned. (POW, p. 24)
3. a datum which keeps things from being in a confusion and around which other data align (NSOL, p. 66)

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 FEBRUARY 1965, KSW ​

IS the stable datum for $cientologist



This is to be fixed in a $cientologist mind - LRH assumed $cientology would survive as it is

Psychopathic thinking - $cientology had born, grow, got mature, is declining and will die.
As well as his sacred words will fall into deep silence , soon or later - despite he did intent to keep it as a stable datum, (for mankind salvage..) engraved in precious metal to resist nuclear war.

Nothing is stable
LRH created his stable datum concept associated with ''stopping motion or being motionless'' or getting things fixed. It doesn't work in a psysical universe neither in a thinking mind.

Anchor points are a different concept and are not directly related to stable datum concept.

ex: The physical universe is an anchor to the mind - it keeps the mind anchored in present time
despite it is in constant moving and changing.

A fix idea on ''black cats are dangerous'' is a stable datum

That is when a body of knowledge can collapse - when it is based on fixed ideas\concepts to remain fixed

A true spiritual knowledge is not made of significance, neither concepts or thaughts - it is made from understanding through observation of true impermanent nature of phenomenons - It doesn't collapse as it only take account of motion and changing nature, according to physical universe . It doesn't rely on stable datums and is thus not in confusion. Concepts bring about confusion as concepts, beliefs, faith are to be kept in place - thus fall apart when a pillar is shaken. It's what the ego is about. Maintain stable datums to not fall into confusion (under light of true nature of things)

(the reason why many $cientologist will never give away despite they know it's a scam)

*Despite an assertive way of writing - it's only a personal opinion!

 

[TheSpectator]

Here's a stable datum for you: Fuck Off!

(Some people can never make the break from the goat fuck that is Scientology.)

 

[lotus]

Here's a stable datum for you: Fuck Off!

(Some people can never make the break from the goat fuck that is Scientology.)

That's their stable datum LRH gave to handle their pseudo-confusion
:confused2:

AS LRH said, if it is invalidated the rest will fall apart. :confused2:

 

[F.Bullbait]

Anchor points are a different concept and are not directly related to stable datum concept.

ex: The physical universe is an anchor to the mind - it keeps the mind anchored in present time
despite it is in constant moving and changing.

A fix idea on ''black cats are dangerous'' is a stable datum

That is when a body of knowledge can collapse - when it is based on fixed idea to remain fixed

A true spiritual knowledge is not made of significance, neither concepts or thaughts - it is made from understanding through observation of true changing nature of phenomenon - It doesn't collapse as it's only record motion nad changing according to physical universe . It doesn't rely on stable datums and is thus not in confusion. Concepts bring about confusion as concepts, beliefs, faith are to be kept in place - thus fall apart when a pillar is shaken. It's wha the ego is about. Maintain stable datums to not fall into confusion.

(the reason why many $cientologist wil never give away despite they know it's a scam)

*Despite an assertive way of writing - it's only a personal opinion!

Thanks for the reply. I prefer the minimalist approach.

 

[lotus]

I do prefer too - as I have a very much minimalist mind

But it doesn't work with $cientology mindset
Each premise given as a part of a $cientology concept has to be dissecated
to then evaluate the validity of such LRH ''given for true'' concepts



It usually intends to help for the lurkers , and sometimes can be of help for the believer, when the stable datum is already a bit shaken - only to look further



So here a minimalist approach to $cientology concept of stable datum

 

[DoneDeal]

Well.....

I used to be someone who thought everyone else thought the same, cept for me

Then I became someone who thought everyone should think like me, as a scn'ist.

Neither one worked out too well.

I don't have the answer and I'm now sure no one does.

 

[F.Bullbait]

Each premise given as a part of a $cientology concept has to be dissecated
to then evaluate the validity of such LRH ''given for true'' concepts

Ya, I guess it depends on how big a point one wants to make of a point.

Me, I'm too lazy today to do the philosophic two-step.

 

[lotus]

Ya, I guess it depends on how big a point one wants to make of a point.

Me, I'm too lazy today to do the philosophic two-step.

Me usually never get into this philosophic debates with $cientology concepts
but felt a bit masochist with little sparks of brain today :confused2:


Arghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
Didn't ron said : when you have a problem find a bigger one

A little bit of Cheerleading would be very much appreciated - feel lonely

Anyway - a glass of wine is my choosen stable datum for the next moment

 

[lotus]

I just went to the liquor store and created a stable datum.

Too much wine - very much confusing

Australian white is my stable datum to feel comfortable.

I always find pretty much good wine for a cheap price and I feel anchored within my budget.

Thank you to $cientology tech!

 

[Techless]

It is, gosh, just so nice to have these little clarifications of Scn stuff! It's like: I apparently was never actually able to ever think for myself...yet I broke free, long before I was broke.

Might someone clear up for me my confusion on MEST entities? I mean, are there like thetans and then mest bodies, and THEN: this other entity thing? WTF??? Is it the holy trinity thing?

I'm sure it'll all become obvious to me at some point soon...

then maybe NOT-

 

[lotus]

Why not contemplate your beer, or the sunset ???
It will be so much enlighting :confused2:

IMHO

LRH was totally in confusion with spiritual being vs mind vs mental
I've caught him one time (in a lecture) say '' your thetan''
(if someone can find one of them - please post it)

Okayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
Here we get a body who owns a thetan

Toc toc toc
Whom, this thetan I have here, belongs too????

And then we get body thetans


Hello hello hello
Earth call planet Xenu

Can I get back my thetan please ????? I've lost it!
:confused2:
Yeah - can be delivered in ice cube -sure!

* I apologize for stalking this post but my body can't control my thetan!

 

[Claire Swazey]

Now there's a lot of poorly understood data in the world and in Scientology. When you do understand a concept and that concept can be used to better one's life we are talking about a stable datum. Now that's really the layman's definition but that's where we should be aiming. Stable data help you understand some area of life, work, etc., via an (often) simple mechanical process. The subject is intimately tied to Scientology and winningness in general. This is bedrock technology. We can go lower but only by an order of magnitude and then it really becomes more about correct intuition (a kind of knowingness) and less about situational understandingness. Ok? My purpose here is to reinforce and stabilize your understanding of what is meant by stable data so that you can begin to work with this datum should you so choose. This is probably a subject that deserves its own 50 to 100 cassette lecture set from the Church of Scientology. If you've made it this far, good. Let's look quick at the technical dictionary definitions so we can have a basis to improve our understanding further.

Scientology technical dictionary definition:

Stable datum:

1. until one selects one datum, one factor, one particular in a confusion of particles, the confusion continues for the remainder. (POW p. 23)
2. any body of knowledge is built from one datum. That is its stable datum. Invalidate it and the entire body of knowledge falls apart. A stable datum does not have to be the correct one. It is simply the one that keeps things from being in a confusion an one which others are aligned. (POW, p. 24)
3. a datum which keeps things from being in a confusion and around which other data align (NSOL, p. 66)

Some quick observations about the above definitions:

a. Any body of knowledge may be built from one datum or it may be built from multiple data. Scientology has logics, axioms and Qs which are all more numerous than one.
b. A stable data lessens confusion but may not eliminate it. Just because you understand one aspect of your life doesn't mean the rest of your life is necessarily now magically less chaotic.
c. Note that a stable datum doesn't even need to be correct.
d. The term "confusion" isn't sufficient here. What we mean is chaos, adversity, unhappiness, inability, etc. in addition of course to simple confusion. In other words, subjectively, the person may not be experiencing confusion but some other thing. Technically stable data serve to better understanding which isn't always opposed to confusion. Worth noting probably.

These definitions are not sufficient, really, not least because they do not stress the importance of the subject, but because they simply do not really breathe life into such concepts as data alignment, mechanics, or the suppositional groundwork sitting beneath this subject. Ok? So consider again if these definitions are sufficient for you to make your own life better. It would be weird indeed to have poor definitions for stable data in a subject designed to really to communicate almost entirely the correct stable data. That probably can't be overstressed, but draw your own conclusions.

Let's take a quick moment to ice our confusion and regain our perspective by giving our minds a simple and correct definition from which to work. Ok? The stable datum is the thing you understand which you then feel better about things because you know you do understand them better. That is the stable datum. It can be as mechanical as buying your boss coffee each morning as a way to convey respect because it is recognized as a simple right action. The stable datum is, let us posit, understanding the value of right action. The action coming out of it is buying the coffee. Ok?

So there's really probably a very nice science sitting about 100 pages into this subject. You do have stable data already in your life. The wife comes home angry and you know you'll be cooking dinner and perhaps you draw her a bath and put on some music. Beneath that action is a supposition which is a stable datum. In recognizing that you are using them, how you are using them, when you are using them, if you are using them correctly, etc. you will have at least taken back some control of your own processes and that I think is close enough to the Scientology definition of a win.

The subject stable datum is and get this as critical one potential solution to the experience we call life. The correct stable data can be the difference between unlimited happiness and being stuck in the mud. When you study a subject do be mindful of what stable data it is proposing for which problems and see if they are workable. Hopefully you're feeling better after reading this. Apply this where you can it's wonderful stuff but don't, please, use it to avoid correct handling where it is due. And please don't use it as a mechanism of control outside of where correct senior stable data would naturally allow. Ok?

Good luck and safe and happy weekend. Thanks to Ron for all his good will and effort.

I like the idea about the stable datum. Now, whether its characteristics, traits and applications are as represented by Hubbard is another matter entirely. I find that Hubbard cloaked an awful lot of his observations with truisms and half truths.

However, as far as believing there is such a thing as a stable datum, hell yeah, there is. I'm studying (very very) basic Algebra now (god help me) and what's my husband starting me out with? Stable data. Yep.

 

[mockingbird]

Okay I don't want to burst anybody's bubble BUT, lrh got the idea of the stable datum and confusion from his favorite subject HYPNOSIS ;one of the methods for inducing (causing) hypnosis is called paradox or confusion: in which a person has their mind CONFUSED by a hypnotist, or even tape or book and by having their conscious attention diverted they become more vulnerable to suggestion. Like all forms of hypnosis this works to varying degrees at varying times on people.

That fact HELPS hide hypnosis because some people appear to "choose" to cooperate when hypnotized and so it appears to be a matter of preference;IT"S NOT!

When you are hypnotized it can be very subtle and just progressively slightly diminish your critical and independent thinking abilities. It also can regress your mind to a childlike trusting impressionable state.

Milton Erickson and many hypnotists wrote about this technique working DESPITE the victim not consenting or knowing they were being hypnotized.
In study tech the student with method 3 word clearing actually induces this state THEMSELVES ;How ?

Simple ,aside from lrh including hypnotic writing patterns in virtually ALL his tapes and books ,the student confuses themself. they read a sentence or paragraph or page and they KNOW they understood the words, BUT they spot "mu phenomena" (most of which are merely renamed HYPNOTIC symptoms) and "know" they have an mu.

This creates the confusion of both understanding and not understanding the materials in the student's mind. The "mu" found is very often a word that the student actually understood in context ,BUT didn't have an instant rote rundown of every definition, BUT that's not really how we learn and use words.

We normally try to understand them IN CONTEXT and frequently use and UNDERSTAND words we don't have definitions for in a certain grouping.
Ie figment,foremost,gist,poke (from pig in a poke)etc.. By "spotting the mu the student thinks they resolved the confusion and FEEL better because they have an answer why they where confused,BUT it's the wrong answer and masks that they are hypnotized.

I know this is a truly dreadful revelation and am sorry. This is the part of the con that I have the most knowledge and experience with and I plan to do the most I can to expose.

When I tell scientologists that study "tech" is hypnosis they invariably say "NO" and I say okay, what do you think of the methods of hypnotic induction ? How about hypnoidal states ? somnambulism ? Mimicry ? conversational or covert hypnosis ? heightened suggestibilty ?
But if you don't know any of these terms or concepts, even by other names, you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground when it comes to hypnosis.

I sincerely apologize if this offends anyone,BUT I have seen EXPERT exscientologists interviewed on TV who swear scientology is hypnosis.
Okay, great , the reporter then says "how is scientology hypnosis ?" EXPERT oh, I don't KNOW anything about hypnosis ,BUT I know that scientology is!

This is part of why people never recover ! They don't know what to recover from!

I have A LOT more info on this and plan on EXTENSIVELY covering it,but I strongly suggest checking out lermanet and Jon Atack's work THEY gave me the clues I needed to start this hunt .

Virtually EVERYTHING lrh wrote on confusion relies on scientologists unknowingly using this technique, or a variation thereof to hypnotize themselves and each other!

A word of caution is in order regarding hypnosis; many texts and tapes on hypnosis have hypnotic techniques used in their writing to SUGGEST hypnosis is safe or cannot harm or mislead; this is pure pr to make the subject accepted and NOT TRUE!

lrh knew exactly what he was doing as evidenced by many references to hypnotism in tapes and books; just google 1952 tape decision or 1950 tape educational dianetics.