After several years of trying to find the precise mechanics of havingness, I think I’ve come very close.
Havingness is apparently the willingness and ability to duplicate in all senses of the word. It also has many lesser connotations but the havingness ability of a pc apparently depends upon his willingness and ability to duplicate, again in all senses of the word.
That which makes communication work in processes is the duplication part of the communications formula (Axiom 28).
The position of a being on the tone scale is determined by his willingness and ability to duplicate. The lower the tone of the being the less willing the being is to permit similar incidents to happen again. This outlaws the experience factor and leaves the being with an “experience-scarcity” which causes him to refuse further experience.
All this is remedied by objective havingness processes (objective duplication increase). The bank additionally must be adjusted by subjective confront processes (subjective duplication increase).
A case will not advance appreciably until the being can remedy objective havingness. Objective havingness, the ability to remedy it, determines the entrance point of a case. Before a process to improve a pc’s objective havingness is well established, the case will not advance, no matter what else is run. After a process that remedies objective havingness is sufficiently established to bring the E- Meter tone arm down to the clear read for the pc’s sex, the case will advance on confront and help and other processes so long as objective havingness is re-established frequently.
Objective havingness is probably incapable of making a case totally stable in the absence of other subjective processes.
As havingness is the willingness to duplicate room objects (Axiom 28), then anything which improves the pc’s ability to duplicate improves his or her havingness.
If a verbal process, after considerable test of various verbal command objective havingness processes, fails to work, the pc may be run on the new Presession XXXI or CCH 3 or CCH 4 or both CCH 3 and CCH 4.
Various old mimicry processes have some workability and we now know why. They are duplication processes and work only because they raise havingness.
I feel sort of slow on this one. It took me six years to find and establish it. But it gives us now the entrance point of all cases. This is why they did or did not make gains. They could or could not remedy objective havingness. Possibly (by 1st Saint Hill ACC case standards only) some 25 out of 40 pcs are not able to run “Look around here and find something you could have” and successfully remedy their havingness without havingness undercuts being used. Therefore this is a critical point in cases and demands care at the very start of a case.
An objective havingness process must be found for every case which will reduce or increase the tone arm to clear read for the pc.
Thirty-seven new havingness processes now exist. Use them.
People go out of present time because they can’t have the mest of present time. That’s it.
Present time is the only referral point that exists. In its absence all becomes “bank”.