6108C08 SHSpec-35 Forgettingness The reactive mind is basically that area of occlusion which the PC is unable to contact and which contains a total identification of all things with all things and until released into the realm of havingness, continues to react upon the person, compelling him into actions, dramatizations, and computations which are not optimum to survival. We find in the reactive mind all the residual, not as-ised material which the individual is seeking to avoid. All the discreditable things of his existence are then contained in this area. He hangs onto them, the knucklehead! He has various mechanisms of survival connected with this, one being the justification of the aberrations he has. Psychology makes the error of saying that one is only able to create by virtue of one's reactive mind. Faculty psychology (c. the 1500's) was an attempt to understand perception and the mind. They didn't get anywhere because they dealt with the analytical sphere and got confused by the fact that men don't always react rationally. Behaviorism overlooks the unpredictabilities of men when they don't follow the stimulus-response mechanisms. Until scientology, a theory about man was too precious not to be carefully guarded from attack. Men went to the stake to protect the theory of faculty psychology. They threw away case histories to protect the theory of behaviorism. The abundance or scarcity of all things applies. Theories were terribly scarce. In scientology, we are looking at an abundance of theories. What we care about is what works. Former theorists didn't care whether their theories were workable or not. They just felt they should protect the theory. The cure of a reactive bank is knowingness, because the substance of the bank is not-knowingness. There's a fourth postulate: remember. The third was forget; it is senior. It's been stressed that one should run that, rather than remember. In order of making, the four postulates are: 0. Native state: potentiality of knowing everything. 1. First postulate: not know 2. Second postulate: He had to know something. 3. Third postulate: He forgot what he knew. 4. Fourth postulate: Remember. A thetan does this on any given subject. When you enter a school, you start by postulating you know nothing about the subject. That's really a request to find something you don't know. In other schools, you're asked to not-know and then learn a lot of nonsense. The only thing that ever blows up a false theory is the workability of a counter-theory. We know more about the unpredictable side of man than any other body of people on earth, so any breakthrough we make in the area is valuable. The breakthrough is in the area of forgettingness and confusion. Man wants things to be forgotten. He not only uses forgettingness as a continuous overt act; he wants forgettingness to occur. He wants all his evil deeds to be wrapped in the Stygian darkness of yesteryear. Man is basically good, so it his deeds are considered bad, then there's only one cure for them that he knows: To forget them. So, as an auditor, you can ask, "what should be forgotten?" He'll recover almost at once a screaming impulse to make something forgotten, and that is where his volition and the reactive mind cross. His volition desires occlusion; back of all his confusion is a knowable volition: he wishes a forgettingness to occur, and that wish creates a reactive bank. That is the postulate that comes ahead of everything: he must forget. So it can be reached with, "What should be forgotten?" There's a danger that this will become a forgotten point of scientology. The postulate, "It must be forgotten," must be the most forgotten of all postulates, so it must be the one least able to be as-ised, and thus best suited to accumulate the concatenation of a bank. The hidden standard is a cousin to this. You can handle the hidden standard by asking what is hidden about it or what should be forgotten about it -- and it blows. The PC's attention frees up and he knows processing works for him. You can ask, "What would have to happen for you to know scientology works?"; strip all the motion out of the needle, and you'll have a list of hidden standards. [More details on running of this." Any psychosomatic or livingness difficulty a person has is a difficulty because there's something about it he doesn't want known, and he wants others to forget it. Compulsive rememberingness brings about forgettingness. One pulls it in with the must have on remembering, which postulates the likelihood of forgetting. And vice versa: someone who goes off to the South Seas so as to forget, first tries to forget with women, then with liquor, dope, then death. But all his urgency to forget keeps it there. He pushes one button and gets the other. This develops an awful confusion, which is then buried with death and occluded, forming the stimulus response mechanism of the reactive mind, because his power of choice and his postulates are being overwhelmed, even if it's him who's overwhelming them. Restoration of memory on the whole track is the index by which you can measure case gain most easily. If someone doesn't think he's lived before, he's heavily plowed into forgettingness, while the guy who has only delusory recall on track is doing a pretended knowingness of the whole track. This is a games condition of magnitude. It's denying knowingness by giving a false knowingness. It's forgetting and remembering at the same time -- very confusing and irritating to confront. The irritation comes from one's awareness of the games condition, putting you into the position of being an unwilling opponent. If it goes on long enough, your own occlusion is assisted. The target is to occlude your track by giving false knowingness about theirs. Confusion asks itself to be forgotten because it was never remembered. That is, it is not-known. That's what makes a confusion a confusion.