From International Viewpoints (IVy) Issue 11 - April 1993
See Home Page at

Kemp's Column

By Raymond Kemp, USA

Why Something New?Part 2

In a recent column, I proposed that the reason why people abandon
one thing and then start something new is that, often, they did not
understand the original.

A colleague of mine is an absolute whiz on computers: he
runs a successful multi-million dollar business, which you would
recognize - if I were to name it - as one of the largest computer
companies in the world. Now, every once in a while, I will call him
and ask about a problem I am having or a concept that I am working
on. Always I get back more information than I ever asked for or
needed, and it takes me a few hours to digest what he said and to
sort out what I was asking in the first place from the torrent of
information he graciously bestows.

However, after all this, I find that I cannot do what he proposes,
and so have to go back and run the process again, often with the same
or an even larger flood of information as before.

It has taken me some time, but finally I realized that, in this
torrent of information, there is often a piece missing, and that piece
is what we would call the Vital Datum. One little item he does not
tell me, but which is the key to the whole thing.

When I tackled him on this point, he agreed that probably it
was the case, but then stated: 'How can I tell you the vital data
when I do not know what, out of everything, is the vital data?'

An interesting point. And one which I have examined very
carefully in other interpersonal relationships and activities.

Pam also became interested in this aspect, and referred to the
Vital Information Rundown, where you basically word clear and pull
past overts off certain key words, like Truth, Datum, etc.

At first sight, it seemed that Ron has misnamed the Vital Information
Rundown, but then we found that, within the body of that collection
of information, he refers to the Vital Data.

Leaky Roof

As an example, we have just had severe storms and flooding,
resulting in my roof leaking. I called the insurance company and the
roofing contractor.

The insurance company were sympathetic, but do not cover 'rain
leaks'. The contractor was very efficient, and stated that I needed
to re-roof the entire house. All very straightforward, with apparent
understanding by all concerned.

Then I re-examined the scene, using an old technique of
Ron's called 'Look - Don't Think'.

I realized that there was more to this scene than we had heretofore
thought. The building is a three part mobile or prefabricated house
(it was factory-built, then the parts were moved onto the site,
and joined). There was a slight difference in the width of the house,
front and back. Examination showed that one section had settled
of the heavy rain, and this had stressed the roof to the point where
it lost its watertight integrity. The configuration of the roof was
two peaks, with a gully in the middle (like an inverted W), and this
gully had accumulated all the run-off and was contributing to
the problem.

Pointing this out to the contractor, I suggested that he re-build
the center portion of the roof, building a continuation of the two
peaks, leaving no gully for the rain to accumulate. He thought it
a brilliant idea, now wonders why the original builders had never
done this, and intends to recommend it in similar circumstances. (It
cost little more than 5% over the original estimate.)

I then called the insurance adjuster, who came out and inspected
the house based on my discovery of the apparent settling. He agreed
that this had contributed to the rain coming in, and, since it was
a structural flaw, it became covered (partially) by the insurance

What are we looking at here? My brilliance and genius? Much
as I would like to take credit, the answer is No...we are looking
at pulling the vital data/datum out of the whole available set of
data information and significances that existed.

Prior to doing this, everyone concerned was fully understanding
the scene: the roof leaked and the rain came in...but this
was not really going to handle the whole scene. It was not until
we got down to the vital datum that a real understanding became
and, like finding a real Why (see Data Series), the door to handling
was opened.

The very word vital is defined as Life promoting or Life giving.
Without it, you cannot bring life into anything.

It might, then, be a good question to ask an auditor, by
whatever title he now uses, to examine the whole subject of auditing,
of Scn, of the philosophy, the technology-'What is the vital
datum, or what are the vital data of the subject you studied?'

The money you spent, the upsets you had, the disagreements
with other people's reality, and so on, surely are not vital (life

Of course, if one studied a subject and never evaluated its
importances to highlight such vital data, there was no life in the
application, and with no life we can have only robotism left! In every
field or collection of information, there are one or more vital data.
If you cannot or do not isolate and identify that which is vital,
you cannot bring that field or collection of information to life.

The fact remains that, until a person can isolate what is
vital from a mass of information, understanding cannot enter. This
applies to both the transmission of data to another and the person
who is looking at the information for himself.

Finally, how many of the disaffected realize that you can
use Scientology technology to run out Scientology, and how many have
done it?

All you get left with is Truth, and the vital data that, maybe,
you never recognized before.

Tue Jul 11 19:13:17 EDT 2006