Stable Datums

Part 1: Maybe we should inspect our stable datums

First of all, let us look at the definition of a few key terms concerning stable datums and the efforts to inspect them.

DOCTRINE OF THE STABLE DATUM, a confusing motion can be understood by conceiving one thing to be motionless. Until one selects one datum, one factor, one particular in a confusion of particles, the confusion continues. The one thing selected and used becomes the stable datum for the remainder. (POW, pp. 23-24)
— L. Ron Hubbard

Stable datums make inspection and evaluation unnecessary, thus the wrong stable datum can bring disaster to an individual or organization, as lack of inspection leads to stupidity.

Any body of knowledge, more particularly and exactly, is built from one datum. That is its stable datum. Invalidate it and the entire body of knowledge falls apart. A stable datum does not have to be the correct one. It is simply the one that keeps things from being in a confusion and on which others are aligned. (POW pg 24) L. Rom Hubbard

A stable datum keeps confusion at bay and this can relieve one of inspecting what is being kept at bay.

Therefore a stable datum is what one uses to handle confusions. Its value can only be determined by the extent to which it aids one’s survival.

A stable datum can be the presence of a leader, the existence of a policy or official proclamation or it can be a computation or a service facsimile adopted to handle a confusion.

A stable datum is what one uses to handle confusions. If it cannot be inspected or questioned, the confusions being held back will continue to grow until they overwhelm the stable datum and a debacle occurs.

Here are some examples of stable datums:

The Auditor’s Code gives auditors the successful actions that allow them to help preclears. Ignorance or avoidance of this code almost invariably produces upset and unhappy preclears. Those auditors who follow the code are far more successful. This would seem to be a useful stable datum.

“We deliver what we promise” was a stable datum in the Church of Scientology for many years. Staff would go to extraordinary lengths to make sure that students and preclears got what they were promised. It was something that we could rely on. No matter what went wrong, it seemed that staff would do what it took to make things come out right. The current COS does not deliver what is promised and public and staff are leaving in droves.

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 FEBRUARY 1965, Keeping Scientology Working is a stable datum for loyal church members. It lays out rules which must not be questioned and must be followed exactly in order to be considered a Scientologist. It defines Ron as the only source of all technology and establishes him as one who has risen above the bank.

It defines the successful actions required to get a technology applied:
One: Having the correct technology.
Two: Knowing the technology.
Three: Knowing it is correct.
Four: Teaching correctly the correct technology.
Five: Applying the technology.
Six: Seeing that the technology is correctly applied.

Then it makes sure that no loyal church member will commit heresy by investigating any other technology or application:
Seven: Hammering out of existence incorrect technology.
Eight: Knocking out incorrect applications.
Nine: Closing the door on any possibility of incorrect technology.
Ten: Closing the door on incorrect application.

This is one of the documents that transformed the freewheeling Scientology Organizations of the 50′s and 60′s into a well-organized cult using threats and punishment drive to ensure compliance. Violations of this stable datum are the highest crimes in Scientology.

This stable datum holds back any questioning of the history of Scientology, or of the development of the technology, or of the true history of the organization and of its founder.

If anyone were to look for themselves and question whether the technology was still a work in progress, they are exercising a power of choice that no longer exists in Corporate Scientology. Any questions regarding the motives of management, application of the technology, or non-optimum use of policy is an invitation for attack.

This is one of the main stable datums which justify ignoring any and all reports that are not issued by the self-appointed leader of Corporate Scientology. With the appearance of this document, Scientology became a faith-based organization and any search for truth was no longer permitted.

Stable datums make inspection and evaluation unnecessary, thus the wrong stable datum can bring disaster to an individual or organization, as lack of inspection leads to stupidity.

The desire to follow ones knowingness and inspect stable datums that do not appear to be survival oriented is exercising ones power of choice.

Gallileo did this and got whacked by the Catholic Church. Some independents are doing this with regard to Scientology stable datums and are coming up with answers that trouble the church. Heresy is just a matter of exercising your power of choice. Once upon a time exercising your power of choice was an expected outcome of auditing and training.

Outside church walls, exercising your power of choice is still an option for those who wish to increase their knowingness and certainty.

Part 2: Stable Datums and the Tone Scale

Stable datums can help us organize things in the presence of confusion or they can be used to block off any perception of the confusion. There are many ways to establish a stable datum and they assist our survival in proportion to where they lie on the tone scale.

The Tone Scale – short version

The tone scale is a gradient scale of states of being with enthusiasm at the top, antagonism in the middle, and apathy near the bottom.

Individuals and organizations operating near the top of the tone scale seem to flourish and prosper and improve the survival of those they deal with.

Individuals and groups lower on the tone scale spend most of their time fighting other individuals and groups. They are chronically angry or antagonistic and life is a constant struggle because everyone else seems to be against them.

Individuals and groups that spend most of their time in a state of grief or apathy are not surviving well at all. Life feels pretty damn hopeless and there is little expectation that things will ever get better.

Stable Datums at Different Tone Levels

Near the top, the group and individuals in it are highly analytical. They search for different viewpoints in order to broaden their own reality. They might adopt a stable datum like that attributed to Buddha:

“Believe nothing until you have experienced it and found it to be true. Accept my words only after you have examined them for yourselves; do not accept them simply because of the reverence you have for me.”

Ron Hubbard said something along the same lines in the last paragraph of “How to Study Scientology” published in February 1959:

“So, the only advice we can give to the student is study Scientology for itself and use it exactly as stated, then form his own opinions. Study it with the purpose in mind of arriving at your own conclusions as to whether the tenets you have assimilated are correct and workable. Compare what you have learned with the known universe. Seek for the reasons behind a manifestation and postulate the manner and in which direction the manifestation will likely proceed. Do not allow the authority of any one person or school of thought to create a foregone conclusion within your sphere of knowledge.Only with these principles of education in mind can you become a truly educated individual and a good Scientologist.”

Down in the middle, the group and the individuals in it are bluntly authoritarian. They defend their own reality and attempt to undermine other realities. By 1965 the Church of Scientology had slid down the tone scale to antagonism and adopted the stable datum of KSW #1 which contains these statements:

“Therefore actions which neglect or violate this Policy Letter are HIGH CRIMESresulting in Comm Evs on ADMINISTRATORS and EXECUTIVES. It is not “entirely a tech matter” as its neglect destroys orgs and caused a 2-year slump. IT IS THE BUSINESS OF EVERY STAFF MEMBER to enforce it.”

“In all the years I have been engaged in research I have kept my comm
lines wide open for research data. I once had the idea that a group could
evolve truth. A third of a century has thoroughly disabused me of that idea.
Willing as I was to accept suggestions and data, only a handful of suggestions
(less than twenty) had long-run value and none were major or basic. ”

“Our technology has not been discovered by a group. True, if the group had
not supported me in many ways I could not have discovered it either. But it
remains that if in its formative stages it was not discovered by a group, then
group efforts, one can safely assume, will not add to it or successfully alter
it in the future.”

“When we do instruct somebody properly he becomes more and more tiger. When we instruct half-mindedly and are afraid to offend, scared to enforce, we don’t make students into good Scientologists and that lets everybody down. When Mrs. Pattycake comes to us to be taught, turn that wandering doubt in her eye into a fixed, dedicated glare and she’ll win and we’ll all win. Humor her and we all die a little. The proper instruction attitude is, “You’re here so you’re a Scientologist. Now we’re going to make you into an expert auditor no matter what happens. We’d rather have you dead than incapable.”

Near the bottom of the tone scale, the individuals and the group are in grief or apathy and exhibit a complete withdrawal from conflicting reality. There are thousands of people who have left Scientology because of incorrect application of tech or policy. Many have been mishandled and have had no subjective reality on the gains that can be achieved through the correct and compassionate application of technology. Many of these have adopted these stable datums:

“Scientology is a complete ripoff!”

“Scientology kills!”

There are no OTs!”

The Churches of Scientology should be destroyed along with all of the Hubbard nonsense!”

Evaluating Stable Datums

There is no evaluation possible at the two lower tone levels. Both sets of stable datums have been driven in by force or abuse.

KSW #1 is enforced by the paramilitary priesthood of the Sea Org thouugh punishment or verbal abuse. The bitter stable datums at the bottom of the tone scale are the product of painful experience and are basically engrams that can only be run out with careful processing.

At the highest level, individuals are able to investigate and analyze the stable datums they adopt and are free to alter them at will. This power of choice is not available at the lower levels of the tone scale.

How do you feel about the stable datums you use in life?

Part 3: Evaluating a Stable Datum

Now there are some who might ask, “Why would you want to evaluate a stable datum?”

Well, let’s say that your use of a certain stable datum was not reducing confusions and was causing your statistics to crash.

Another reason to evaluate a stable datum is that it is decreasing your ability to communicate with others and is therefore decreasing your income.

You choose a stable datum to hold off the confusions in life and to help you align things so they can be understood and managed.

A stable datum does not have to be the correct one. It is simply the one that keeps things from being in a confusion and on which others are aligned. (POW, pp. 23-24) — L. Ron Hubbard

Some people would like to classify stable datums as ABERRATED or TRUE datums with some stamp of authenticity from a supposedly reliable source. Unfortunately, stable datums are like most things in life. They are only as good as they promote survival of an individual or group.

You need to evaluate a stable datum for yourself to determine whether it promotes your survival. Having someone else tell you that some stable datum is the answer to everything makes you other-determined. Having someone force a stable datum on you and not letting you question how it came to be and how well it is working puts you at effect and limits your survival.

 

Thus, if you are prevented from evaluating how well a stable datum aids your survival, you are getting your first clue that this is indeed an aberrated stable datum.

Let’s take some real world examples of analytical stable datums:

  • Believe nothing until you have experienced it and found it to be true.
  • Compare what you have learned with the known universe.
  • Trust but verify.

You can evaluate them against your own experience and can exercise your power of choice regarding your use of these stable datums. If they do not aid your survival, you can inspect them and find out what has to be changed.

Lets look at some stable datums that resist inspection and evaluation even though there are ample amounts of contrary data available for scrutiny:

  • Carbon Dioxide is a poison and we need to reduce the percentage in the atmosphere.
  • L Ron Hubbard is the only source of Scientology technology.
  • David Miscavige is Scientology and the only source of Command Intention
  • Altering Scientology (called squirrelling by L Ron Hubbard) only comes about from noncomprehension.
  • Civilization faces a catastrophe because of Man-Made Global Warming.

People are exercising their power of choice regarding these and many other stable datums and you are welcome to do so also. You need to evaluate every stable datum for yourself to determine whether it promotes your survival.

If you are being prevented from evaluating a datum, that should give you a clue as to how aberrated it is. A true datum can be tested and will be seen to be correct if all the facts are available.

3 thoughts on “Stable Datums

  1. Interested Party

    This is good stuff. It’s a subject I’ve been looking at and thinking about for at least a decade in wondering how to get people to look at new data that challenges the way they currently think.

    I’m interested in finding ways to have another person find and state their own stable data. I suspect merely discovering what stable data you have on a particular subject can either blow it or lead you to come up with better ones just by looking at them.

  2. Kevin

    I do believe in the single person source, as LRH successfully compiled some axioms and some truths. I do admire the stable datum of source. I also admire the hard line view that rallies the faithful around the center (source). Where my decisions depart from source, those are the points that demonstrate my prerogatives. I have both the privilege and the right of departure (after I clear the words). In order for me to enjoy this prerogative, the hard line center must exist. Both must exist- the faithful center, providing a stable datum, the skeptic (individual thinker) providing release from forced-adherence. The two positions must exist. Both are critical. Knowing and recognizing which camp you belong to will help you to survive for awhile, at least until you change your mind. When I was on staff, 37 years ago, I drew up an Admin Scale for each dynamic. This is a sometimes repeated exercise that I continue to find very helpful in evaluating my stable data.

    thanks for reading.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *