The following first appeared in the private email list IVy-subscribers,
which was available to all those who subscribed to the
printed magazine, International Viewpoints.
Goals and Souls
by Phil Spickler
9 Feb 2000
I have been most pleased to enjoy the vigorous commentary that has
gone on for some time on the subject of goals. I do believe it's an area
that was more or less abandoned for various reasons, and I'm glad to see that
it's being picked up again and most surely advanced by the work of Alan
Walter and perhaps others.
Being weak of mind and unsound of body, I should like at this time to
add some old and possibly some new thoughts about this enticing subject. In
fact, one might say that my goal in communicating about goals is one of
I seem to remember that some time around 1960 (or perhaps a little
later) there was quite a buzz coming down the line from Washington, D.C.
about goals and how important it was for everybody to come up with a 900- or
925-item goals list. It was one of those periods when I took off from
full-time Scientology and engaged in the business of construction engineering
so as to provide good shelter and regular meals for those folk I came to call
Popping ahead to St. Hill, England, 1963, goals were certainly all the
rage; the GPM had been defined; and the emphasis on goals auditing had
shifted from implant goals to what came to be called the person's own goals.
This shift took place in the late summer of 1963 -- summer I believe
consisted of 3 days in a row when it didn't rain, and took place after the
British bank holidays, during which it rained incessantly. In those days we
Yankees used to make jokes, as did Ron, about what the Brits called a summer.
Anyhow, the idea of the person's or thetan's own goals as opposed to
implant goals was in theory that there are goals or purposes that the guy
hisself (under the definition of the "guy hisself" being a single-unit being
called a thetan, someone who had existed perhaps for eternities) throughout
this time had created or postulated -- goals or purposes which made possible
the great games of life that could be played along these enormous corridors
of time; and that it was very important for the chap to find out what his
goals had been throughout these vast periods of time and thus regain the
powers and the perceptions that had been gradiently lost over the trillennia.
And simply finding such a goal that correctly indicated could indeed
answer a lot of questions and produce a lot of understanding and resurgence
in a person quite quickly.
When I was at St. Hill that very same summer, the model session of
those days inevitably asked of the pc what goal or goals they might like to
set for the session, and inevitably at the end of the session one would ask
questions concerning what progress had been made in that direction, what
gains had been achieved.
One of the liabilities of having the pc set goals for every session
(and in those days everyone got at least 5 sessions a week) was that the
question took on the character of what we would call a "listing question,"
and for those of you who are auditors out there reading this who can remember
the Laws of Listing and Nulling, you know that great hazard can come to
someone being audited if you don't handle listing-type questions correctly,
nay, I should say perfectly.
So this habit of asking for goals at the beginning of every session
was one more nail in the coffin that eventually resulted in dropping the
whole idea in the not-very-distant future.
There might, as B. Wimbush pointed out, also be the liability that
what was being audited in that session might or might not be directly aimed
at the pc's goal or goals for that session; and it was sad to find oneself or
see others literally inventing gains and accomplishments in a particular
session in hopes of keeping their auditor alive for further auditing. The
saddest example I ever saw of this was a film made of a session given by Ron
to Reg Sharpe in which the pc's entire session consisted of an effort to give
Ron the auditor wins and make the auditor look good. Ron at that time was so
fouled up that he was the only person viewing or experiencing the session who
didn't realize what was going on and what a sad travesty of auditing was
Anyhow, it still remains very much my opinion that in order to safely
navigate the goals area and do the most possible good for the pc, the client,
or whatever we're calling the poor devil these days, that you must take into
account the composite nature of the human being and be ever-alert to the fact
that you may be dealing with entities (other souls, if you will) and be very,
very sure in this area to check for the correct ownership of a given goal and
make sure that everyone for whom it is a right item has that correctly
indicated, and furthermore handle anyone for whom it is not a right item.
I would also urge anyone using this tech to be very much on the lookout
for list phenomena when you start asking people at the beginning of sessions
questions like "What goals do you have for this session?" or "What goals
would you like to set for this intensive?", 'cause as you well know, if that
starts a list on someone, you'd best be able to either take it to one correct
item with fabulously good indicators or, using list correction, make sure
that the pc is not driven 'round the bend by overlisting or underlisting or
any of the other nightmares that come in that area.
The action of simply finding a correct item for someone, anyone, in
the shape of a goal or purpose should, if the ownership is spot-on, blow the
person's mind and the goal simultaneously without the requirement of any
lengthy procedure to follow. And since it will almost always prove to be
someone else's goal, it is really not a very lengthy procedure to a
I'd sure like to hear from anybody who is currently doing live work
with living people on the subject of goals and to hear what they think of my
ideas and of goals and gains that they themselves may be achieving with the
Having long ago discovered what I am not, this particular soul has no
goal, but could have any upon demand. Exit stage right, and goodnight --
P.S. When the model session was invented back in the early '60's, both the
beginning and the end of the session were a rote procedure, the theory being
that this would cause sessions to be run out through duplication and leave no
lingering trace in the mind of the pc. This theory did not prove to be true.
Furthermore, 37 years later and in settings that do not resemble St. Hill in
the early '60's, I would certainly expect any practitioner/auditor/processor
working in the field to have established with their client well in advance of
a session, or series of sessions, what the client was doing there and what
they hoped to get out of their auditing. This all presumes that the client
is there of their own free will and that some exchange of value is taking
place between the involved parties for that which is given and that which is