Way back in 1979, when I was on the HQS course, which included student co-auditing on both objective and subjective processes, I took a special interest in better understanding objectives, and read scores of HCOB’s on objective processing that weren’t part of the checksheet. Not only did that give me a much greater understanding of thetans, cases and case handling, but it was time well spent in that it greatly expanded my skills to understand what was happening with my PC’s as I ran them on objective processes, and I was far more able to catch and notice automaticities turning on and off, that otherwise would have gone unnoticed, and it would have appeared that little or no change was occurring. I’ve seen in so many PC folders where objectives were quickied, and ended off at the first little thing the auditor could escape with as an indication of increased awareness, falling far short of the true end phenomenon for the processes, and in fact leaving the PC unflat, and not set up to run to the depth they otherwise could have gotten to on subsequent subjective auditing. Objective processes, properly programmed and run to full EP, achieve dazzling results. When they don’t, the PC has been shortchanged.
I also learned from this and other experiences in training and auditing, that most of the checksheets, I trained on gave a student just enough to take a PC in session and then get pink-sheeted on all the the other technical data one has to know to be fully able to get full results on a PC.
One more point of importance. It is always readily observable that those whose only training is the solo course do not get all that there is to get out of auditing at any and all levels. In fact, it is an overt to permit a PC to progress only through the processing side of the bridge without doing everything possible to successfully enlighten them to train as auditors. If you’ve only done the one side, and wondering why you don’t feel like you’ve “got it”, you need look no further than that.
Love, Dex