Intent during study is very important: as you study, what do you intend to do with the information.
Most textbooks do not fulfil the criteria of (1) having information to deliver and (2) delivering it in a way that can be assimilated (the Study Tapes really assume that they do).
The universities with the hardest exams, or the greatest number of failures, do not necessarily produce the most brilliant students.
Study is a very fruitful field for a suppressive. It, like government, attracts SPs like honey attracts flies, in text books as well as behind the lecture rostrum.
E.g. navigation: the exam has little to do with the reality.
Ron explains the fundamentals of navigation to show how easy it is, in contrast to how difficult it is made to appear.
In navigation, use of only mathematics will wind you up on the rocks.
Text books seem to be taking the route of only being comprehensible to the expert. E.g. Encyclopædia Britannica.
Also, text books can contain incorrect emphasis and incorrect data.
A book can give a “doom and gloom” view of a subject so you constantly worry about things going wrong. You lose the fun of it or don’t do it.
This is suppression of a subject.
A suppressive treatment deals with the dangers and neglects the good points (e.g. easy waters in sailing).
You must not neglect the dangers that are there, but don’t over-emphasise them.
The SP on the track has done this with the subject of the mind–“it’s too dangerous”. This has scared off all intelligent research.
What is needed is an appreciation of the study materials by people who write material to be studied.
Scientology has a lot of nomenclature because it has to name things that weren’t previously known.
The study materials weren’t known when the nomenclature was devised, so it could have been done better.
At the time of the lecture there is no dictionary of Dianetics and Scientology, but nearly everything is defined in the text at the point that it first appears (however this fact is hindered by a number of missing recordings, e.g. Elizabeth and Wichita).
Therefore Ron recommended that a Saint Hiller used the original method of study: cover it all lightly to get a good grip on it all, and then what you really had to know, study that for starrate. Volume was what it took.
Missing definitions is solved to a marked degree by “for what purpose are you studying?”
Until you clarify that, you cannot make an intelligent activity of it.
Studying for examination is complete folly.
It’s very hard to put things into an exam that show ability to apply.
The practical man is impatient with the academic man because he cannot do.
The basic and important difference between practical study and academic study is the practical man asks the question “How can I apply this to what I am doing” of whatever he studies.
This is the whole reason why you get failures in practise after certification.
A person studying for examination does not need to know the exact meanings of all of the words because he can just rattle it off as part of the original sentence in a pat answer.
He tends to move the material out “over there” and have nothing to do with it while he is busy studying it.
A booby-trapped, suppressive subject can be studied for examination, but can’t be studied for application, as there is nothing there to be understood.
In Dianetics, the student is being told to study the material so he can go audit right now! This brings about the frame of mind of studying for application.
One is taught very bad habits of study ion schools and universities because so much stress is put on examination. One can become a social outcast (“dropout”) through failing his exams.
However, “dropouts” are very often very successful (four early dropouts earning more than $25,000 each).
We check in vain to find a single philosopher, except Mills, who ever got a passing grade in school or who stayed in school to its end.
“Do-ers” rebel against the inapplicability of texts they are given in university.
Some “professors” even guard the “deadness” of a subject and suppress any attempt to make it useful (maybe because that would take it out if their hands).
The entirety of the study materials depend upon the material being studied and the attitude with which it is studied; the purpose and intention of the student.
The subject of economics probably causes more trouble to man than any other. The subject of economics has been obfuscated by the slant put on it by various “isms”.
Therefore trying to apply one of these false economic systems will be difficult.
I.e. you can also pervert a subject so that it is no longer applicable or assimilable.
This is what happened to Freud’s work, which originally had a lot of workable technology.
By studying for application you can identify what is comprehensible and get it sorted out.
You will find teachers who warn people against simple text books, and large stratas of society get a “down” on simplification.
No comments:
Post a Comment