Русская версия

Site search:
ENGLISH DOCS FOR THIS DATE- Out Tech and How to Get It In - B650913
- Out Tech and How to Get It In (KSW-26) - B650913R81

RUSSIAN DOCS FOR THIS DATE- Вне Тех и Как Это Исправить (Серия СДС 26) - Б650913R81
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
Remimeo Vital Data for Tech Secs Ds of P HGC Training Officers Ds of T Course Supervisors All Students


The term “OUT TECH” means that Scientology is not being applied or is not being correctly applied. When Tech is IN we mean that Scientology is being applied and is being correctly applied. By TECH is meant technology, referring of course to the application of the precise scientific drills and processes of Scientology. Technology means the methods of application of an art or science as opposed to mere knowledge of the science or art itself. One could know all about the theory of motor cars and the science of building them and the art of designing them and still not be able to build, plan or drive one. The practices of building, planning or driving a motor car are quite distinct from the theory, science and art of motor cars.

An auditor is not just a Scientologist. He or she is one who can apply it. Thus the technology of Scientology is its actual application to oneself, a preclear or the situations one encounters in life.

Tech implies USE. There is a wide gap between mere knowledge and the application of that knowledge.

When we say tech is out, we might also say, “While that unit or person may know all about Scientology, that person does not actually apply it.”

A skilled auditor knows not only Scientology but how to apply the technology to self, pcs and life.

Many persons auditing have not yet crossed over from “knowing about” to “applying”. Thus you see them fooling about with pcs. When a skilled auditor sees a critical pc he knows BANG — pc has a withhold and pulls it. That’s because this auditor’s tech is in. Meaning he knows what to do with his data.

Some other person who knows a lot of Scientology, has had courses and all that, yet sees a critical pc and then tries to add up everything he knows about pcs and stumbles about and then decides on a Zero pc it’s a new thing that’s wrong that’s never been seen before.

What’s the difference here? It’s the difference between a person who knows but cannot apply and a skilled technician who can apply the knowledge.

Most golfers know that you have to keep your eye on the ball just before, during and after you hit it. That’s the basic datum of powerful, long drives down the fairway. So if this is so well known then why do so few golfers do it? They have arrived at a point of knowing they must. They have not yet arrived at a point of being able to. Then their heads get so scrambled, seeing all their bad drives which didn’t go down the fairway, that they buy rabbits feet or new clubs or study ballistics. In short, not being able to do it, they disperse and do something else.

All auditors go through this. All of them, once trained, know the right processes. Then they have to graduate up to doing the right processes.

Observation plays an enormous role in this. The auditor is so all thumbs with his meter and unfamiliar tools he has no time or attention to see what goes on with the pc. So for 15 years lots of auditors made releases without ever noticing it. They were so involved in knowing and so unskilled in applying, they never saw the ball go down the fairway for a 200 yard drive!

So they began to do something else and squirrel. There was the pc going release, but the auditor, unskilled as a technician for all his knowledge of the science, never saw the auditing work even though even the auditing done that badly did work.

Do you get the point?

You have to know your tools very very well to see past them! An auditor who squirrels, who fools about with a pc, who fumbles around and seldom gets results just isn’t sufficiently familiar with a session, its patter, his meter and the mind to see past them to the pc.

Drill overcomes this. The keynote of the skilled technician is that he is a product of practice. He has to know what he is trying to do and what elements he is handling. Then he can produce a result.

I’ll give you an example: I told an auditor to look over a past session of known date on a pc and find what was missed in that session. Something must have been missed as the pc’s tone arm action collapsed in that session and ever afterwards was nil. So this auditor looked for a “missed withhold from the auditor in that session”. The ordered repair was a complete dud. Why? This auditor did not know that anything could be missed except a withhold of the hidden overt type. He didn’t know there could be an inadvertent withhold wherein the pc thinks he is withholding because the auditor didn’t hear or acknowledge. This auditor didn’t know that an item on a list could be missed and tie up TA. But if he did know these things he didn’t know them well enough to do them. A second more skilled auditor took over and bang! the missed item on the list was quickly found. The more skilled auditor simply asked, “In that session what was missed?” and promptly got it. The former auditor had taken a simple order, “Find what was missed in that session,” and turned it into something else: “What withhold was missed in that session?” His skill did not include applying a simple direct order as auditing looked very complex to him as he had so much trouble with doing it.

You can train somebody in all the data and not have an auditor. A real auditor has to be able to apply the data to the pc.

Importances play a huge part in this. I had a newly graduated darkroom photographic technician at work. It was pathetic to see the inability to apply important data. The virtues of ancient equipment and strange tricks to get seldom required effects were all at his fingertips. But he did not know that you wiped developer off your hands before loading fresh film. Consequently he ruined every picture taken with any film he loaded. He did not know you washed chemicals out of bottles before you put different chemicals in them. Yet he could quote by the yard formulas not in use for 50 years! He knew photography. He could not apply what he knew. Soon he was straying all over the place trying to find new developers and papers and new methods. Whereas all he had to do was learn how to wash his hands and dry them before handling new film.

I also recall a 90-day wonder in World War II who came aboard in fresh new gold braid and with popped eyes stared at the wheel and compass. He said he’d studied all about them but had never seen any before and had often wondered if they really were used. How he imagined ships were steered and guided beyond the sight of land is a mystery. Maybe he thought it was all done by telepathy or an order from the Bureau of Navigation!

Alter-is and poor results do not really come from not-know. They come from can’t-apply.

Drills, drills, drills and the continual repetition of the important data handle this condition of can’t-apply. If you drill auditors hard and repeat often enough basic auditing facts, they eventually disentangle themselves and begin to do a job of application.


The truly important data in an auditing session are so few that one could easily memorize them in a few minutes.

From case supervisor or auditor viewpoint:

1. If an auditor isn’t getting results either he or the pc is doing something else.

2. There is no substitute for knowing how to run and read a meter perfectly.

3. An auditor must be able to read, comprehend and apply HCO Bs and instructions.

4. An auditor must be familiar enough with what he’s doing and the mechanics of the mind to be able to observe what is happening with the pc.

5. There is no substitute for perfect TRs.

6. An auditor must be able to duplicate the auditing command and observe what is happening and continue or end processes according to their results on the pc.

7. An auditor must be able to see when he’s released the pc and end off quickly and easily with no shock or overrun.

8. An auditor must have observed results of his standard auditing and have confidence in it.


The auditor and the Case Supervisor must know the only six reasons a case does not advance. They are:

1. Pc is Suppressive.

2. Pc is ALWAYS a Potential Trouble Source if he Roller Coasters and only finding the RIGHT suppressive will clean it up. No other action will. There are no other reasons for a Roller Coaster (loss of gain obtained in auditing).

3. One must never audit an ARC Broken pc for a minute even but must locate and indicate the by-passed charge at once. To do otherwise will injure the pc’s case.

4. A present time problem of long duration prevents good gain and sends the pc into the back track.

5. The only reasons a pc is critical are a withhold or a misunderstood word and there is NO reason other than those. And in trying to locate a withhold it is not a motivator done to the pc but something the pc has done.

6. Continuing overts hidden from view are the cause of no case gain (see number 1, Suppressive).

The only other possible reason a pc does not gain on standard processing is the pc or the auditor failed to appear for the session.

Now honestly, aren’t those easy?

But a trainee fumbling about with meter and what he learned in a bog of unfamiliarity will always tell you it is something else than the above. Such pull motivators, audit ARC Broken pcs who won’t even look at them, think Roller Coaster is caused by eating the wrong cereal and remedy it all with some new wonderful action that collapses the lot.


You could meter assess the first group 1 to 8 on an auditor and the right one would fall and you could fix it up.

You could meter assess the second group 1 to 6 on a pc and get the right answer every time that would remedy the case.

You have a list in the HCO Pol Ltr Form of 26 June 1965 done for Review. That covers the whole of any errors that can be made on a pc scouting both the auditor’s application and the pc’s reaction to the auditing.

When I tell you these are the answers, I mean it. I don’t use anything else. And I catch my sinning auditor or bogged down pc every time.

To give you an idea of the simplicity of it, a pc says she is “tired” and therefore has a somatic. Well, that can’t be it because it’s still there. So I ask for a problem and after a few given the pc hasn’t changed so it’s not a problem. I ask for an ARC Break and bang! I find one. Knowing the principles of the mind, and as I observe-pcs, I see it’s better but not gone and ask for a previous one like it. Bang! That’s the one and it blows completely. I know that if the pc says it’s A and it doesn’t blow, it must be something else. I know that it’s one of six things. I assess by starting down the list. I know when I’ve got it by looking at the pc’s reactions (or the meter’s). And I handle it accordingly.

Also, quite vitally, I know it’s a limited number of things. And even more vitally I know by long experience as a technician that I can handle it fully and proceed to do so.

There is no “magic” touch in auditing like the psychiatrist believes. There is only skilled touch, using known data and applying it.

Until you have an auditor familiar with his tools, cases and results you don’t have an auditor. You have a collected confusion of hope and despair rampant amongst non-stable data.

Study, drill and familiarity overcome these things. A skilled technician knows what gets results and gets them.

So drill them. Drill into them the above data until they chant them in their sleep. And finally comes the dawn. They observe the pc before them, they apply standard tech. And wonderful to behold there are the results of Scientology, complete. Tech is IN.


[Additional data to this HCO B can be found in HCO B 21 September 1965, Out Tech, on the following page.]