The United FreeZone
Author: Tree Frog
Posted: Mon 25 May 1998 05:22 am
Somehow we need to get together.
Any Ideas ??
Tree Frog
Author: NYKinjo [kinjo@mvg.biglobe.ne.jp]
Posted: Mon 25 May 1998 06:59 am
I agree with you overall. The reason is, from my viewpoint, we need to build our Bridge as another standarized route to spiritual freedom. Currently, despite the wealth of technology collected and often refined here, we are not bringing people closer to freedom on a regular basis.
Author: Kevin Grant Brady (Rockslam) [rockslam@hotmail.com]
Posted: Mon 25 May 1998 12:03 pm
There is freedom, and there is freedom.
We may not yet be bilking 'em by the hundreds of thousands yet, but we'll get there one day...
Until then, we are providing a DATUM OF COMPARABLE MAGNITUDE.
This will help in making rational decisions, even if the decisions occur slowly. Maybe if everyone in the Free Zone gave me 150,000 dollars, then I could get advertising and start driving them in (for a modest fee of only 125,000 skimmed off each DONATION.)
Have you looked at the statistics of Ron's Orgs? Or IDENICS, or any of our other FZ practitioners? Can we measure the impact of just existing as a terminal for the Scios to discharge with?
We ARE freeing people. We are just not liberating their wallets as effectively yet.
FREE THE WALLETS!
%KGB%
Author: Kevin Grant Brady (Rockslam) [rockslam@hotmail.com]
Posted: Mon 25 May 1998 01:25 pm
I present these as bedrock upon which the Free Zone has every right to build itself, and its many foundations. LRH, if he was truely the author, deserves great credit for their formulation and for getting them into so many people's consciousness. (Also to back up my earlier comment about the Free Zone helping just by being a DATUM OF COMPARABLE MAGNITUDE.) Please examine them in a new unit of time, and consider its implications about WHY "SOURCE" could be consider the "source of aberration" in Scientology: I really believe just the existence of the Free Zone could cause Scientology to get cleaned up.
The Logics of Dianetics (1951)
Logic 1: Knowledge is a whole group or subdivision of a group of data or speculations or conclusions on data or methods of gaining data.
Logic 2: A body of knowledge is a body of data, aligned or unaligned, or methods of gaining data.
Logic 3: Any knowledge which can be sensed, measured or experienced by any entity is capable of influencing that entity.
COROLLARY: That knowledge which cannot be sensed, measured or experienced by any entity or type of entity cannot influence that entity or type entity.
Logic 4: A datum is a symbol of matter, energy, space or time, or any combination thereof, in any universe, or the matter, energy, space or time itself, or any combination thereof, in any universe.
Logic 5: A definition of terms is necessary to the alignment, statement and resolution of suppositions, observations, problems and solutions and their communication.
DEFINITION: Descriptive definition: one which classifies by characteristics, by describing existing states of being.
DEFINITION: Differentiative definition: one which compares unlikeness to existing states of being or not-being.
DEFINITION: Associative definition: one which declares likeness to existing states of being or not-being.
DEFINITION: Action definition: one which delineates cause and potential change of state of being by cause of existence, inexistence, action, inaction, purpose or lack of purpose.
Logic 6: Absolutes are unobtainable.
Logic 7: Gradient scales are necessary to the evaluation of problems and their data.
This is the tool of infinity-valued logic: Absolutes are unobtainable. Terms such as good and bad, alive and dead, right and wrong, are used only in conjunction with gradient scales. On the scale of right and wrong, everything above zero or center would be more and more right, approaching an infinite rightness, and everything below center would be more and more wrong, approaching infinite wrongness. All things assisting the survival of the survivor are right for the survivor. All things inhibiting survial from the viewpoint of the survivor can be considered wrong for the survivor. The more a thing assists, survival, the more it can be considered right for the survivor; the more a thing or action inhibits survival, the more it is wrong from the viewpoint of the intended survivor.
COROLLARY: Any datum has only relative truth.
COROLLARY: Truth is relative to environments, experience and truth.
Logic 8: A datum can be evaluated only by a datum of comparable magnitude.
Logic 9: A datum is as valuable as it has been evaluated.
Logic 10: The value of a datum is established by the amount of alignment (relationship) it imparts to other data.
Logic 11: The value of a datum or field of data can be established by its degree of assistance in survival or its inhibition to survival.
Logic 12: The value of a datum or a field of data is modified by the viewpoint of the observer.
Logic 13: Problems are resolved by compartmenting them into areas of similar magnitude and data, comparing them to data already known or partially known, and resolving each area. Data which cannot be known immediately may be resolved by addressing what is known and using its solution to resolve the remainder.
Logic 14: Factors introduced into a problem or solution which do not derive from natural law but only from authoritarian command aberrate that problem or solution.
Logic 15: The introduction of an arbitrary into a problem or solution invites the further introduction of arbitraries into problems and solutions.
Logic 16: An abstract postulate must be compared to the universe to which it applies and brought into the category of things which can be sensed, measured or experienced in that universe before such postulate can be considered workable.
Logic 17: Those fields which most depend upon authoritative opinion for their data least contain known natural law.
Logic 18: A postulate is as valuable as it is workable.
Logic 19: The workability of a postulate is established by the degree to which it explains existing phenomena already known, by the degree that it predicts new phenomena which when looked for will be found to exist, and by the degree that it does not require that phenomena which do not exist in fact be called into existence for its explanation.
Logic 20: A science may be considered to be a large body of aligned data which has similarity in application and which has been deduced or induced from basic postulates.
Logic 21: Mathematics are methods of postulating or resolving real or abstract data in any universe and integrating by symbolization of data, postulates and resolutions.
Logic 22: The human mind is an observer, postulator, creator and storage place of knowledge.
The human mind by definition includes the awareness unit of the living organism, the observer, the computer of data, the spirit, the memory storage, the life force and the individual motivator of the living organism. It is used as distinct from the brain which can be considered to be motivated by the mind.
Logic 23: The human mind is a servo-mechanism to any mathematics evolved or employed by the human mind.
POSTULATE: The human mind and inventions of the human mind are capable of resolving any and all problems which can be sensed, measured or experienced directly or indirectly.
COROLLARY: The human mind is capable of resolving the problem of the human mind.
The borderline of solution of this science lies between why life is surviving and how life is surviving. It is possible to resolve how life is surviving without resolving why life is surviving.
Logic 24: The resolution of the philosophical, scientific and human studies (such as economics, politics, sociology, medicine, criminology, etc.) depends primarily upon the resolution of the problems of the human mind.
Author: Mike [mikegh@concentric.net]
Posted: Sun 28 Jun 1998 03:26 pm
Myself and another want to form a local group interested in the free zone. This would include people interested in all forms of clearing, church reform or setting up co-training and co-audits. Any or all of the above. Informal primary plans are to set up a meeting weekly, at a location agreeable to all, and see where it goes from there. We're in the San Francisco East Bay Area. But before we can set up a meeting location we need people! If you are in this area please e-mail me or call me at (925)372-0170 or (925)372-3231. If you are not in this area but have ideas or suggestions I would still like to hear from you.
Thanks,
Mike Hunsaker
|
