6206C14 SHSpec-157 Listing

In 3GA, you can form up the wording for an ordinary goal quite easily.
For instance, if the goal is "to catch catfish", you would use:

___ ___
| 1. Want | to catch catfish?
| |
| 2. not want |
| ---
Who or what would | ___
| 3. oppose | catching catfish?
| |
| 4. not oppose |
--- ---

Note that we had to change the wording of the goal to fit in the "oppose" and
"not oppose" lines. If there is any doubt about the acceptability of changing
the wording of the goal, just put the words, "the goal" after "want", etc.
This has to be done frequently with a negative goal, in order to avoid an
awkward double negative. This procedure is still imperfect, but there is no
way to get it perfect. [See p. 285 for an amendment on the wording.]

The goal is a prime postulate that has accumulated onto itself a number
of identities by which the purpose could be executed. The goal [or the PC, in
taking on this goal as a prime postulate] has assumed these identities because
there were people who didn't want the goal -- who were stupid and
incomprehensible [See p. 247] . So one had to prove to them that the goal was
OK. There were other people who desperately opposed this goal. There were a
bunch more who were somehow associated with it. If you can't express these
four flows on your listings, the process won't go clean.

To change wording in mid-flight can be quite upsetting to the PC, so
after you have done the prepcheck and the goal is reading beautifully, be sure
of that wording. It should register. Be certain that it is the wording for
the four flows for that goal. This is not to say that you will never change
the wording of a listing. Sometimes you have to, when you find that the line
never has listed.

You will probably list on a low sensitivity to get reads on the tone arm
easily. Every fifth session, prepcheck She whole subject of goals, listing,
and auditing newly, just as in goals assessment. And run middle ruds every
time you stop running a list, whether they are needed or not. There is a
period of action for each list that decreases. The length of time a list is
active before you leave it becomes progressively shorter. TA action will be
good, then it will get slow. Do mid-ruds, then go to the next list.
Establish a pattern.

We can't tell where this prime postulate [the goal] will sit on the PC's
Crack or what GPM cycle this thing precedes. We don't know that, so we don't
know how much bank we are relieving, in running this goal. But normally, half
an hour of listing on a list seems overly long. When starting off on a
mucked-up PC, you would probably only be able to do one list per session, to
get all the TA out. This procedure is not necessarily recommended, since it
is unbalancing and impractical. So you had better do the listing by count of
Stems, or by Minutes, at first. However, if you stop a PC in the middle of an
automaticity, he gets a suppression. So, allowing for automaticities, you
should more or less list an arbitrary number of items for each list, listing,
say, fifteen minutes for each list. None of those lists will be exhausted by
doing it this way. If the PC gets into an automaticity, for heaven's sakes,
don't stop him in his tracks, because he will do a suppress. If a PC is
listing rapidly and freely, let him go on listing. None of these
automaticities will go for more than 150 items, more or less.

On listing, it is very bad form to:

1. Tell the PC to wait while you write down an item.

2. Fail to write down an item.

Either one is a crime. You pays your money and you takes your chance. Learn
to write faster; than is about all you can do. Pcs can be encouraged to
common lag, but this is not advised either!

Your four lists should be kept to approximately equal lengths. One may
tend to be shorter, e.g. "not oppose". If this happens, list the short one
as extensively as possible and list the others as briefly as you can. In the
first part of listing, you list by arbitrary number. It doesn't matter too
much what the number is, since there is so much mass to get into. However,
later on, you will find yourself running into a free needle, and it is a crime
to continue to list a line on which a free needle has appeared, because you
are running a process that is not producing change. When you get the F/N, you
test the next line. If it doesn't disturb the F/N, test the next line, and so
on. When you have all four flows F/Ning, that goal is dead. Go find the next
goal. If a line does stop the F/N, list it to F/N or for awhile, until you
see that it is not going to F/N, then go on to the next line. This evens out
all the charge, so that at the end, all the lists will be equal -- not in
length, but in amount of charge blown.

"I must caution you against the sins of overlisting." Listing a flat
process is an Auditor's Code break. [See the Auditor's Code of 1954 No. 13:
"Always continue a process as long as it produces change, and no longer." This
is in The Creation of Human Ability, p. 3.] It will upset the PC, but that is
not why you shouldn't do it. The goal you are operating with on this PC is
not the prime postulate by which he entered this universe. It is only the
beginning of some cycles that you have laid your paws on by a goals
assessment. It has some harmonic against an earlier goal. So, if you
overlist, you push the PC back into an earlier GPM or pull up earlier track,
out of place. So just list the lines to F/N, not beyond F/N. It is a relief
to talk to you about what you do with a free needle.

Toward the end, you will find the time so short on each list that putting
mid-ruds in every time you change lists is too frequent. So do it after the
PC has listed ten to fifteen items, however many lists that may be.

The only reason a PC stops listing is that he has some middle rudiment
out. This is true for both goals listing and lines listing. A PC can
accumulate enough charge between sessions that the middle ruds have to be
prepchecked to clean it all up. Never get the idea that the PC can run out of
items. "Pcs don't think of items. They deal them off the bank. If he had no
more items to deal off, he would have no more GPM." So the PC stops listing
only when the mid-ruds are out and he therefore can't get into communication.

What do you do when you have brought one goal, four lists, to F/N? In
earlier days, you would have called him clear. You could still call him
clear, and get his F/N back with a little clean-up of ruds any time.

Watch your acknowledgements in listing. Writing the item down is
acknowledging. You can also go, "Mhm," and make little encouraging noises.
Don't give a full-stop ack. That ends cycle and acts as an inval.

An auditor listing can feel so much like a secretary, with all that
inflow, that he loses control of the session. So when you have stopped
listing, give a good acknowledgement and do brisk middle ruds, looking like a
proper auditor. In listing, you must look like an auditor during ruds,
because you look so little like an auditor the rest of the time. Then, when
the mid-ruds are clean, you go back to listing with a good auditing command.
It is the last command you will give until you stop listing that list. It is
an awfully long auditing answer. The PC lists for two pages, then you go,
"Mhm.... Any more?"; you repeat the question gently. "Who or what" makes for a
plurality of answers. The PC doesn't lose the command. If he runs down, you
can give the command again to get more. If he simply refuses to go on, get
middle ruds in. Also get them in at the end of the list. Give the PC the
R-factor that you are going to do mid-ruds "before we go on with this list."
Get them clean and get more items.

An item is very delicate. It is easy to squash one, or to glum one up.
It is also tempting to fake understanding an item, but if you do, it enters a
missed withhold into the session which will blow up. Right then, when you
didn't understand something, admit it: "I didn't get that." TR-2 says you
understand. If you don't, falsity enters in, which will destroy the session.

Do good admin on lists. Keep parity. You will notice, when an actual
goal is listed out, that an item will transfer from list to list. When an
item has been in all four lists, that is just about the way is is the item has
been or all four flows. When all four flows are discharged, the item is fully
discharged against other items and lies null.

After listing is complete, find a new goal. The list will be shorter;
the time to find it is less. You get a dwindling quantity of everything.
Eventually, you will wind up with a theta clear. "It is my guess you'll find
a type of goal you find in the basics of scientology. These things will
suddenly register. Is there one basic goal for all pcs? Oh yes, but they
can't reach it, and it's not real. You want the goal that registers now, not
the perfect goal. They'll get back earlier and earlier on the track and
eventually hit the prime postulate." A clear is as stable as you can't find a
prior prime postulate.

As the GPM is listed, the repetition of the items gets the discharge off
the prime postulate that you call a goal. The definition of a goal is "A
basic postulate for which the individual has taken full responsibility." As
the bricks (the items) built up on the postulate tend not to resist the
postulate anymore, the postulate runs out. You get the thing diminishing and
getting thinner. The PC is now sitting there with all the experience
accumulated along the line and none of the mass, because there is no alter-is
connected with it.