Re: DOUBT CONDITION
From: ralph@hilton.org (Ralph Hilton)
Subject: Re: DOUBT CONDITION
Date: 1999/04/20
Message-ID: <3726a886.159150967@news.telekabel.at>#1/1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <371c3bc5.66304998@mgate.telekabel.at>
<371c6469.0@news2.lightlink.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Complaints-To: news@telekabel.at
X-Trace: news.chello.at 924625377 212.17.110.140
(Tue, 20 Apr 1999 18:22:57 MET DST)
Organization: Chello Austria
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: Ralph@Hilton.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 18:22:57 MET DST
Newsgroups: alt.clearing.technology
On Tue, 20 Apr 1999 06:26:25 -0500, "Jeaux" wrote:
>Ralph, you shouldn't evaluate for someone when he has applied the tech.
>
>He sounded sincere, and all enthusiastic (tone 3.0), and experienced some
>case gain by his decision with his Doubt Formula. That was an important
>decision for him.
>
>Someday when the BPC surfaces, you should give Kevin an ARCX session.
>
>I got your comment about "No conditions are assigned", but for this time it
>was real for him. I don't believe he felt obligated as from an external
>condition assignment, but he came to this conclusion for himself. It was no
>doubt a big step for him.
>
>The Ethics Formulas are one aspect of Scientology that are unquestionably
>pertinent to everyone.
>
>I know you are well versed/trained in the Tech, so it seemed important to
>say this.
My comment related more to someone's incorrect evaluation that it was
appropriate to do liability. (probably UCPman).
The statement that he has bpc on it is evaluative. You are doing exactly
what you are accusing me of.
In my opinion there are serious flaws in the ethics tech
--
Ralph Hilton
http://Ralph.Hilton.org
