Pat Krenik - Running "Objectives"
|Pat Krenik - Running "Objectives"|
|Type of Article||Category:Property "Is type of article" (as page type) with input value "Category:" contains invalid characters or is incomplete and therefore can cause unexpected results during a query or annotation process.|
We ran each objective as long as it produced change and no longer.
So of course that varied from person to person and from objective to objective. The best result I got was running a new person, a waitress, on S. C. S. Never having had any auditing in 1958 I started her on S.C.S. She looked at me suspiciously at first but followed out the commands. There were changes in her demeanor from time to time, and after an hour she finally realized that she'd been given orders as a waitress and understood she could be there on her own determinism. I ran three more commands and she ran with VGIs and it was flat!
It took an hour or two. It worked so well because it was the right process for her.
Oh, the rest was fun too. I found out she had a terror of sharks but no this lifetime experience with them. That went to a stuck picture, and so I used exactly what we did in the ACC I had been trained in, "what part of that picture could you confront" alternated with "rather not confront". The picture eventually blew after a few hours and she was no longer afraid of sharks. Well, all of that was before "Standard Tech:)"
But it isn't so much how long it is run, but is it the right process for the case. We have a cookie cutter tech, which starts out with objectives. How long you have to run these drug cases on objectives I don't know. But the people we had had no drug cases. That was back in the 50's so hard to compare.
Not everyone needs objectives to start out.
Not everyone is an "8" meaning low level case that must have objectives. And the surprising thing is, after OT III it is objectives that raise the skill level of an OT!
It would really be hard to compare how long it takes because of no drugs in the 50's and also most preclears had had some auditing and case gain already. I'd say an hour or two because once you have had some auditing they bite better. That is probably why objectives are on Grade I.
Every objective I had that I made good gain on was run at least an hour and up to 2 1/2.
Which reminds me of processes that make great gain that I can't find anywhere.
"Assign an intention to that ______(indicated object) was the best objective I had had. Brought me up to a realization of purposes.***Found!
"Tell me a lie about that wall" run with Op 8C. Do you see that wall? Walk over to it, Touch that wall...(with hand still on the wall) tell me a lie about that wall. Let go. Do you see that wall....etc.
I can't find that process anywhere, but we were doing in in Bremerton WA in 1956 from some instruction sent from Wash D.C org. It was a great process, two hours, and the walls got solid and the walls got thin--I thought I was going to fall through (two stories from the ground) but it sure gave reality on the perception of this universe. A truly OT process.