GOALS PACKAGE CONSTRUCTION

MP3 DOWNLOAD

The following lecture is on formulating goals packages for running level 5B. Dennis provides valuable insights not only into how to form goals packages, but also into the English language itself.

Study Help

Dennis will mention "ionization", which is infusing a mass with a postulate. In particular, he warns about what will happen if you test out a goals package and either of its positive legs turns the mass black. 

Remember that each of the four manifestations of a goals package are known as "legs". The two positive "legs" of "To know" would be "To know" and "To not be known" and the positive legs of "To help" would be "To help" and "To be helped"

Dennis will also mention "cross-packaging", which is the running of two different goals packages at the same time, which will produce negative results.

e.g. means "that is to say"

Today is the 7th of September 1994 and I'd like to talk to you about the subject of goals package
construction at Level 5B. Now without a shadow of a doubt the most heavily booby trapped and
mine fielded area at Level 5 is this subject of composing junior goals packages and using them in
therapy. 

I've already, in the write up, instructed the student and advised the student to, as far as possible,
stay with the prepared list of junior goals packages. Never the less I have gone ahead and taken
all the bugs out of this subject now and I can give you this information that will allow you to
compose  your  own  goals  packages  at  Level  5B,  provided  that  you  follow  a  few  simple
instructions. 

Rule 1: Goals Cannot Oppose the 'To Know' Goal 

Now so far on this subject I've already mentioned two rules and the first of these rules is that
you have a proposed goal, and you want to know whether it's erasable, so the first rule is: 

That no meaning of the 'To Blank' leg of the proposed goal must be opposed 

to the 'To be known' postulate. 

Now that's our first rule. If any meaning of the goal you have in mind for the 'To Blank' leg of the
goals package you have in mind is opposed to the 'To be Known' postulate, well you can just
write it off. It's a non-life goals package and it will kill you if you try and erase it, it's a non-life
package. 

That's our oldest rule, it's in the write up, it's our oldest rule, it still applies. Note there that ‘no
meaning’; I've generalised it there from ‘meaning’ to ‘no meaning’ of the 'To Blank' leg. Most
goals have more than one meaning and you should look a goal or purpose up in a good dictionary
before formulating it or attempting to formulate it into an erasable goals package at Level 5B.
Check all the meanings, if any one of the meanings are opposed to the 'To be Known' postulate
then the goal cannot be formulated into an erasable goals package and that is final. So check all
the meanings. 

To Change 

An example of the need to check all the meanings is the goal 'to change'. It has the legs 'to
change', 'to be changed'. It looks quite innocuous but when you look up the meaning of 'to
change' in the dictionary it becomes quite clear to you that 'to destroy' is also within the
meaning of 'to change', that you can consider 'to destroy' as a meaning of the verb 'to change',
and because that meaning is opposed to the 'To be Known' postulate the whole of the 'to
change' postulate is unusable. 

You'll find that it just won't come apart in therapy. It is in fact an unusable goal, it's a non-life
goal, and if you put it up and try and run it you will see that it's a non-life goal simply because
some of the meanings of the goal 'to change' are opposed to the 'To be Known' postulate. 

So always check your goals in the dictionary before you attempt to formulate it into a goals
package at Level 5B. 

Rule 2: Ionisation 

Alright, so much for number 1, now number 2. This is the easy one. This is our ionisation rule. Our
goal is unusable if either of the positive legs of the proposed goals package ionise mass black. If
either of the positive legs of the proposed goals package ionise mass black then it's a non-life
goal and we cannot formulate it into an erasable goals package. 

Rule 3: Single Word Goals 

Now the third one. Now this is a new one. Only single word goals can be formulated into
erasable goals packages. 

Only single word goals, e.g. 'To Start' has the legs 'To Start', 'To be Started'. It's a single word. 

Compound Goals 

Let's try the compound goal which has more than one word in it, 'to make known'. Now that
looks innocuous enough, doesn't it? I can assure you that it's un-erasable because 'to make
known' has got 'To Make' in it which is a goal in its own right, 'To Make' and then the ‘known’
there, it's got this idea of known in it there. 

Now the goal 'To Know' is an erasable goal and the goal 'To Make' is an erasable goal. It has the
legs 'To Make', 'To be Made', quite an erasable goal. But the combination of the two of them 'to
make known' is un-erasable. Why? 

Because it's cross-packaging, you’re cross-packaging two goals there. You see that? So 'to make
known' cannot be formulated into an erasable package because it violates this rule of the single
word goal. Only single word goals can be formulated into erasable goals packages. 

And also under this heading delete all unnecessary verbiages, all unnecessary words in your
goals package construction. Words like "upon" or "to" etc. these odd conjunctions. Just lop them
off, they're redundant, they're always redundant. 

You're going to work with a single word goal and it's got to be 'To Blank' and the ‘blank’ is a
single word goal and over the other side there is a 'To be Blank' and in there you've got a single
word goal too. 

There are no odd conjunctions thrown in to make it look right, or to make it seem sensible and so
forth. Just lop them off, they are redundancies, or they might even simply be modifiers like 'to
grow petunias' well the goal there is 'To Grow'. 'To grow petunias' is simply a specific application
of the goal 'To Grow' so it violates our general rule of therapy that we always address the
general before we address the particular, so that goes out too. 

So there's no exceptions, it's always a single word goal. For whatever reason it's a single word
goal. Right that's number three. 

Rule 4: Suffixes 

Now number four we get into this whole subject of suffixes. We're now into the grammar of the
English language and we have to know a little bit about grammar to avoid a number of pitfalls.
Now a suffix in English is an ending which is put onto a word to change its use. 

'-ing' 

For example we have the suffix '-ing', we can stick '-ing' onto verbs and when we stick the ending
'-ing' onto a verb we turn the verb into a noun and it becomes what is called in English a verbal
noun. 

For example we take the verb 'To Eat'. The verbal noun here is "eating". Well we can't use the '-
ing' ending on the end of a word when we want to use this verb in the goals package. If you're
going to use it you're going to have to take the '-ing' off, because when it's got an '-ing' on it, it's
a noun and it's no longer a verb so therefore it's no longer a goal so therefore it can no longer be
formulated into a goals package. 

So the '-ing' has got to come off. What you have left may or may not be useful to you, may or may
not be erasable, but certainly while it's got '-ing' on the end you can't use it. Get the idea? Off
comes the '-ing' suffixes. They've got to come off. 

'-ble' 

The next one is the '-ble' suffix. These turn verbs into adjectives and the '-ble' suffixes are called
verbal adjectives. Again here we have the verb 'To Eat' and we have ‘eatable’ or sometimes we
use the word ‘edible’ but 'eatable' still exists in the language and 'eatable' is a verbal adjective
but it's not a verb so you can't use it in a goals package. 

So off comes the '-ble' suffixes there. They have to come off. Whatever you have left may or may
not be useful. Now while I'm on the subject of '-ble' there's a very common one here that will
fool you, and  this is the goal 'to be responsible'. That will fool you, that will fool almost
everyone, that will, 'to be responsible'. 

You look at it, you say, "Well that's a goal, 'to be responsible'. Well the goal there, the purpose
there is 'to be' the word responsible is a verbal adjective. The word responsible is not a goal, it's
a verbal adjective, you see? So your only goal there in 'to be responsible' is the verb 'to be' which
is not really what you're trying to do is it? You see? So no, you can't use it. 

Responsible 

The word responsible is quite interesting I'll briefly give you it's history. It's quite an interesting
word. It comes from the field of law, the legal eagles. When we take the '-ble' off responsible we
get response and response, of course, is the verb 'to respond'. 

Well the verb 'to respond' in English means 'to answer' and the law in the middle ages needed a
word in the English language which meant that a person was answerable for their actions and
the word they chose was response and they made it into responsible and that's what responsible
means in law. 

It means a person is answerable for their actions, responsible. You see that? But it's not a verb. It
looks like a verb when you say, 'to be responsible' but the verb is 'to be'. You get it? So you can't
use 'to be responsible' if you want to address the subject of responsibility in therapy the correct
goal is 'To Cause'. 

To Cause 

The correct goals package is the 'To Cause' goals package which has the legs 'To Cause', 'To be
Caused',  'To  Not  Cause',  'To  Not  be  Caused'.  That  will  directly  address  the  subject  of
responsibility in the human psyche. 

'-ness' 

Now the next suffix we need to look at is this '-ness' suffix. The '-ness' suffix. Now we stick '-ness'
onto the end of words when we want to convert them into a condition or a state. I'll give you an
example of the construction here of the use of the word '-ness'. 

Let's take the verb 'To Eat' we turn it into 'eating' which is a verbal noun but the state of eating is
'eatingness', we stick N E double S on the end. Well almost needless to say when any word that's
got N E double S on the end and has been turned into a state or a condition by the addition of
the suffix N E double S it cannot be formulated into an erasable goals package. 

So off has to come the N E double S. Ok? 

'-ise' or '-ize' 

Now the final suffix that is of interest to us and somehow will confuse us is this '-ise' or
sometimes it's spelled I Z E. The '-ise', '-ize' suffix. 

Now this is a verbalization suffix. It turns nouns and adjectives into verbs when we add that
suffix to the word. For example, the word "real" is an adjective. We can turn it into a verb by
adding '-ise' on the end. It then becomes 'to realise'. Get it? But what do we mean when we say
'to realise' well we mean 'to make real'. 

That's  what  'to  realise'  means  in  its  actual  context,  in  its  actual  meaning,  in  its  actual
construction. So we have a complex verb here. We have the verb 'To Make'. Now the verb 'To
Make' is erasable but when it's mixed in with this subject of "real", nope, it won't erase. Because
it's simply a modification of the verb 'To Make', is 'to make real', it's a class of makings, 'to make
real'. Nope, it won't work. 

You can erase the goal 'To Make' but you can't erase the goal 'to make real'. Get it? You’re
crossing up, your crossing packaging. So off has to come the '-ise' and the '-ize'. 

Another example: 'to exteriorise' means 'to make exterior', but it's quite un-erasable because it's
got the verb 'To Make' stuck in the middle of it because 'to exteriorise' means 'to make exterior'.
You get the idea? 

So you can't use any of these verbalizations of '-ise' or '-ize' endings to make erasable goals
packages. Just take the '-ise' and '-ize' off and see what you've got left. See if there's a similar
word in the language that can be used and formulated into a goals package. It certainly can't be
formulated while it's in the form of '-ise', '-ize'. Get it? 

Cause and Effect Words 

Now that ends our formal rules. If you follow each of these rules you'll do fine you'll pick your
way through the minefield. Now just another one I want to give you. It's not a rule but it's just a
general observation. There are many postulates, verbs and so forth in our language, which have
become associated with "causation" and there are other verbs in the language which have
become associated with "effect" and this can fool you. Sometimes you get a verb, which because 

of its association with cause or its association with effect can upset you and throw you when you
are trying to put it into a goals package form. 

To Interest 

A very common example of this is the goal 'To Interest'. Now 'To Interest' in our society is usually
regarded as an effect activity. Ron Hubbard pointed out on many occasions that the causative
aspect on the subject of interest is interested and the effect is interesting. Well you can go along
with that idea if you want to. 

The truth of the matter, of course, is that any purpose can be causative or it can be effect. You
know? Strictly speaking any purpose in the language, any goal is a causative activity. All of them
are. Some of them you can regard as an effect but it's merely a later consideration. But this
subject  of  interest,  while  you  believe  this  idea  of  causation  and  effect  on  the  subject  of
interested and interesting you'll have trouble putting that goals package together. 

The correct goals package on this subject of interest is 'To Interest' and 'To be Interested', 'To be
Interested' ending in D. Now that will erase, that is an erasable goals package and it's the only
goals package in this subject of interest that is erasable. 

It's a single word. It's not opposed to the 'To be Known' leg it fits all the rules and there's
absolutely nothing wrong with it. And when you look at it you say, "Oh my God, yes that's it,
that's the one." You see. 

But if you're caught on this subject of cause and effect you'll overlook it, every time. Get it? It's
just because the verb 'To Interest' is regarded as an effect activity and the cause is supposed to
be at the other end of the comm. line. Actually it's a load of bullshit, both 'To Interest' and 'To be
Interested' can be causative activities. So be wary of these goals which by their very meaning or
usage in society have a very strong cause or effect component. 

They can often throw you and confuse you and make it very difficult to put such a goal into an
erasable goals package. Finally, I would like to again remind you at Level 5B that's it's far better
to spend a little time on the proposed goals package to get it right, to make sure it's erasable,
than it is to go off like a bull out of the gate and start to use the thing. 

Make Sure the Goal Is Erasable First 

There's two possibilities that will defeat you here, if you're cross-packaged it might take you a
month or three months of work to find out that you're crossed packaged. Remember cross-
packaged goals grind on forever without producing any change. I mentioned this in the write up.
They're not particularly insidious they don't particularly do you any harm but you've simply got 

two goals packages crossed up together and they just grind on forever. Nothing erases, nothing
nulls, nothing reduces, the whole thing just jogs on forever. 

Well if you want to waste time for three months I suggest you do that. You see that? Now the
other possibility that will fool you is that you get into an un-erasable package. Well some of
these un-erasable packages can be quite insidious. So if you say, "Oh, well I'll always find out, you
know, there's no need to bother to go through all these rules that Dennis has suggested. I'll just
run the goals package and I'll soon find out if it's doing me any harm." 

Well it may take quite a while for you to discover that it's harming you. It's not an immediate
thing, you know, I mean, your head doesn't fall off immediately. It may take a week or two to
start falling off. And the longer you run this goal before you finally realise the damn thing is a
non-life goal the more damage it will do. By this time you've got an awful lot of bad effects from
running it, you've probably got a black field, you've probably got a lot of mis-emotion about you,
you've got a heavy mass impacted all around you. It could easily take you quite a number of
hours to repair the ravages by running RI and timebreaking and getting back to the 'To Know'
goals package to put it all back together again. 

At the end point you get it all back together again and what have you got to show for your two
weeks work? Nothing! You've got nowhere, it hasn't done you a bit of good. So the wise thing to
do is to spend a little time at the beginning and follow the rules of making sure to the best of
your ability that you're dealing with an erasable goals package before you start. 

Now I can't make it any clearer than that, can I, can't make it any clearer than that. If you're not
prepared to spend this time on these goals to put them together and to package them at Level
5B then I strongly suggest that you don't get into the field of composing your own goals
packages. That you stick to the prepared list that I've given you in the write up. 

Now you can play with those to your heart's content. They're all erasable. They've all been tested
so if you don't want to muck about with rules and regulations stick with the prepared list of
goals I've given you in the write up. But if you want to play around with reformulating your own
goals packages at Level 5B then for god's sake follow the rules because it will be easier in the
long run, it's always easier in the long run to follow the rules and get it right before you start.
You know, be 99.99% certain that your goals package is erasable before you even start. 

Now that gives you a great confidence, doesn't it, a great confidence. If you've only got a slight
confidence that your goals package is erasable or you're not sure, then you don't know if any
changes that occur in the session are due to the fact that the goals package is producing normal
therapeutic effects or change in your psyche. You don't know whether the effects you're getting
are because of that or whether the effect that your getting are due to the fact that it's an un-
erasable goals package, you just don't know, do you? So get it right before you start. Get that
certainty, and the only way to get that certainty is to follow these rules that I've given you. 

Rule 5: Not Within Games Goals 

Now there's one final rule which I've left till last because this is the one that can get you into
more trouble than all the other rules put together. It's undoubtedly the most insidious aspect of
this whole subject of formulating goals packages at Level 5B, and this rule states, if a goal has no
meaning outside of games play it cannot be formulated into an erasable goals package at Level
5B. This one will catch you more than any other one. This is the sneaker, yah, this is the sneaker. 

Such goals as, for example, 'to lose' or 'to win'. Even the most innocuous one of all 'to play' even
this one cannot be formulated into an erasable goals package. In other words, what I'm saying
here is that the goal to be formulate-able into an erasable goals package must have some
meaning outside of games play. You get it? 

It's got to have some meaning outside of games play, if it has no meaning outside of games play.
If it's totally within the subject of games play it is for sure un-erasable. 

Games Goals and Civilization 

Some of mankind's most dearly cherished purposes in life are games goals. The purposes of
compulsive games players. Some of his most cherished purposes are things he bases his whole
society upon and wonders why his society never gets off the ground. He wonders why there's
always injustice and intolerance and death and murder and rape and so forth in his societies.
Some of these goals that he bases his societies on are games goals. 

For example an absolutely integral part of the political system called capitalism is the goal 'to
profit'. Well 'to profit' is a games goal. When you come to set this goal up at Level 5B and try and
erase this goal you rapidly discover that it's a completely un-erasable goal. 

Another allied goal to 'to profit' is the goal to 'to exploit' which is another facet of the capitalist
system. And again you put up the goal 'to exploit' and it's completely un-erasable, it's a games
goal. See? It has no meaning... 

Exploitation has no meaning outside of games play. Profit has no meaning outside of games
play. So you get the message? You get what I'm saying here? This is the most insidious of all of
them, most insidious of the non-erasable goals at Level 5B. They look erasable but they're un-
erasable because they have no meaning outside of games play. 

If you can understand that, you can spot them, you will be free of the lot. That's the final
yawning chasm. If you can walk over that yawning chasm, then you've got the lot, you've got the
lot. So that's all I can give you on the subject of formulating goals packages at Level 5B, and I
hope this material is useful to you. 

Thank you very much 

End of tape 

RETURN TO LECTURES INDEX