From International Viewpoints (IVy) Issue 7 - August 1992
By Raymond Kemp, USA
"The Time has Come"
"The time has come", as the Walrus said, "To speak of many things...".
I am prompted by two items recently occurring. One was a reaction to
my article on O.T., which a reader liked, but posed the question that
it may not be acceptable to the general readership, because it
required a review of one's life activity, rather than relying on -
processes - and - authority - to bestow the permission to be O.T.
I accept the information, that reader gave, but started to evaluate
the data, and from there reviewed in general the articles in - IVy, -
and the state of things in society in general.
At the same time I was struck by a TV program, attempting to explain
the ethics of genetic engineering, with interviews of many scientists
and MD's (MD = Medical Doctor.) who were involved in the subject, and
posing the ramifications of the new discoveries.
Few new ideas in Free Scientology
From all this, it seems to me that there has been little advance in
the subject, the applied philosophy, since the death of LRH. Within
the constrictions of the C of S, it is a matter of continuing to do
what LRH said. There is some promotion of greater and better OT
levels, there is a build up of the third dynamic activities, with the
various sub organizations, reaching into Schools, business, Interpol
and drug use, (Ritalin, (An 'upper' drug which is advocated for so
called 'hyper children' to control behaviour at school.) being the
latest target, and one which I personally agree should not be used as
it is being used), and so forth.
In the "Free Zone", however there is little advance beyond re-
examination of processes and procedures, with some attempts to create
a new understanding of what was trying to be achieved, and so forth.
It is a little like a gathering of engineers who will spend hours
arguing and discussing the various ways in which a circuit can be
built to do a certain job, but never going beyond that, into the realm
of creative thought as to new developments, doing new jobs hirtheto
In the USA there is a governor, of the state Alaska, who has been
causing quite a storm, because he insists on coming up with new ideas,
which the Federal Government oppose, because they are "New and
Among these ideas, and he has a cabinet who seriously plan on them,
are: An undersea pipeline, sending fresh water down to California and
even into the parched areas of Baja California. An energy transmission
station in Alaska that would beam energy up to the moon and reflect it
in a broadcast mode for use all over the world, and so forth...
Creative ideas, creative thought, using existing known technology in
Technology exists, which can be used in many extraordinary ways, and
closer to home, a philosophy exists which can be applied in many
Ron once said, "ask a person who is a philosopher, to go ahead and
philosophize", if all they do is quote books on philosophy, then they
are flying under false colors. He also complained once of the number
of people in the field who he wanted to give a new degree to, called
the HPS degree, "Hubbard Professional Student", because it seemed that
all they did was study, but never went into life and applied the basic
philosophy behind what he was trying to teach.
I would like to see more articles on how we can apply what we have
learned, not in Auditing or Counselling, though that is such a
contribution to the sanity of the society, as to be in many places,
considered unreal, and - far out -, but also, articles and discussions
on a broader scope, articles that maybe can be read by people of
different views, creating a wider understanding of what we as a race
are doing or not doing.
Genetic engineering and nuclear fission
For example, this current, and certainly into the future controversy
over genetic engineering.
Currently there exists the technology, to test an embryo for genetic
disorders, the probability of a fetus being born with certain
deficiencies can now be mapped, in such disorders as Downs Syndrome,
Dwarfism, Multiple Scleroses, Irreversible Leukemia, mental
retardation, and so on.
Research is progressing into other items, such as propensity toward
alcoholism, drug addiction, Homosexuality, which may or may not be
However the scientific community are in a state of panic, on the basis
that some say that such research should be banned, and others say that
even if such data is accurate, then the inevitable end result would be
that parents of such fetuses should not be told because they would
want to abort such a fetus.
Argument rages, some feel that, and they quote atomic or nuclear
scientists who went beyond the proper limits and produced a nuclear
bomb, capable of destroying millions of people, and who now feel so
guilty, that they wish they had never pursued that line of inquiry.
These people are of course backed up vociferously by others who want
to ban nuclear energy in all forms. Incidentally you can quickly spot
those people in the USA ... they have such an ARC break, that they can
no longer pronounce the word nuclear, they almost without exception
use the word - Nucular -.
Others feel that the inevitable next step, will be that genetic
engineering will enable people to choose blue eyes, or blond hair, or
all males or all females, or even superhuman types, for the next
generation, and quote the psychotic regime of Hitler and his dreams of
an Arian Race, as the inevitable result of further studies in this
As with the current - pro choice vs pro life - arguments, and as I
mentioned in "You Live as You Think", these arguments come under the
heading - extrapolatio ad absurdum - meaning to carry faulty logic to
it's own inevitable conclusion.
More than this though, there is a glaring outpoint, a missing datum,
that, until examined, will hold all this confusion in place.
The whole subject of genetic engineering, is a subject of bodies.
Human life forms, which are being identified totally as the person.
There is no consideration of the spirit, souls, or as we generally use
the term the thetan, the individual himself.
If the person is not the body, if the body is the vehicle for the
entity, in a manner similar to the concept that the automobile is not
the driver, but that the driver actually controls the vehicle, is a
separate item, (and can even get out of the automobile, or buy a new
one when the old one doesn't run well anymore), then the current
arguments are at best fallacious.
Indeed by any commonly accepted standards, an automobile maker who
knowingly created a poorly designed automobile, and then let it be
driven by an unsuspecting driver, would be liable for the most
vehement criticism and penalty, as irresponsible.
Surely then, if the information is accurate, and a fetus is developing
non optimally, the logical thing to do would be to stop building it,
and start a new one.
If the genes, which are the building blocks of the body, are
deficient, and can not be corrected while in the growth period, then
is it not unethical in the overall sense to allow that body to come to
term, and allow a thetan to occupy it committing that entity to a
lifetime of at best non optimum operation or involvement in the game
To get further, then is it unethical to use the skill and technology
that exists, to create the best vehicle that can be made, for the
Now I am not saying even that all these non optimum conditions are
totally the reactions of genes and are all body malfunctions. We know
for instance that alcoholism broadly speaking is an inability of the
thetan to have a full glass of Alcohol in front of him. The phenomenon
is demonstrable in the physical universe, and is repeatable in the
field of mental mechanics. What is not clear at this time is whether
the interaction between the thetan and the Body on a gene level is
also a factor.
Would you not prefer to have a body, that is as close to flawless as
can be obtained at this time? There may be valid arguments against
gene building or correction, there is at present no standard to hold
to as the ideal scene at a gene level, (I am using the term loosely,
and include the DNA blueprint in this), but unless the separation of
body and spiritual entity is taken into consideration there simply is
no validity in the current arguments.
A note however. What is unethical is the current, and growing
practice, of insurance companies refusing health coverage to whole
families, when they can use the gene factor of any new born as proof
that they may have a greater expense based on the conceived
predisposition to illness as discovered, by gene investigation of the
In a different area, the recent riots in Los Angeles were inflamed by
a mayor who publically told the black segment of the city "To go out
and protest (the trial verdict), in the strongest way possible",
totally ignoring, as have many critics of that verdict, the point that
the jury spent weeks going over - all the evidence - , presented,
including the infamous tape seen all over the world and evaluated on
the spot, by non experts at an emotional level, before they reached
the verdict. Even then, the verdict was a matter of 'Not guilty under
the existing Law', it made no comment on the morality of the incident.
I wonder what changes in the laws of any country, there would be, if
those who make said laws, really knew that in a few years time they
would be back, and living under them. How would a member of the
Klu.Klux.Klan. or the Neo Nazis act, if they were aware that next time
around they could well be born into a jewish Family?
A 'waning' stable datum
For nearly two centuries the western civilization has grown under the
stable datum of Judao Christian Ethic, and we know that a stable datum
does not have to be true, it just has to be stable. Lately, that
stable datum has come apart, and the chaos of today's society stems a
great deal from the lack of that datum.
Our commond bond of philosophic data provides a wealth of as yet
unannounced Stable Data, only a small fraction of it has become
generally recognized, such items as quiet during surgery or Birth, The
existince of pre natal recording, The value of Mental Imagery
(Creative Processing) in Healing, and so forth. How much more of a
contribution could we make if we were to openly introduce some of the
other stable data we have into society.
I do not mean that we should proseletise, or claim in anyone's behalf,
that we (and only we) have the solution to much of society's ills, but
I do believe that we can each of us contribute toward change, by
openly presenting our viewpoints, discussing them, even arguing them,
but above all disseminating them as possible leads toward solutions,
and allowing, even encouraging others to pick up on some simple Stable
Datum, and introducing it into society from that persons own position.
Look over the wealth of invaluable data that you have. Realize that in
many instances, what you think of and classify as "Basic Course
Material", millions who don't have it would consider the same data
close to "Super Advanced Ideas".
Publish or Perish, is an old adage of the academic community, usually
taken to apply to the person. It could also just as accurately refer
to the Data.