No matching fragments found in this document.
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 18 SEPTEMBER 1967
Remimeo
Academies
SHSBC
STUDY
COMPLEXITY AND CONFRONTING
In some researches I have been doing recently on the field of study, I
have found
what appears to be the basic law on complexity.
It is:
THE DEGREE OF COMPLEXITY IS PROPORTIONAL TO THE
DEGREE OF NON CONFRONT.
Reversing this:
THE DEGREE OF SIMPLICITY IS PROPORTIONAL TO THE
DEGREE OF CONFRONT
and
THE BASIS OF ABERRATION IS A NON-CONFRONT.
To the degree that a being cannot confront he enters substitutes which,
accumulating, bring about a complexity.
I found this while examining the subject of NAVIGATION in order to teach
it
and clarify it.
I found that Man had based the subject on an incorrect primary
assumption. All
subjects have as their basis a point of first assumption. In Man's
technology this is
usually weak and non-factual which makes his technology very frail and
limited. To
reform a subject one has to find this primary assumption and improve it.
This
reforming of technical subjects is of great interest to us because our
subject
Scientology is advanced even beyond the space travel technologies of very
high
civilizations. Yet it is flanked on all sides by Man's corny antique
technology in the
field of physics, chemistry, "mathematics" and so on. This tends to hold us
back
somewhat. We strained his tech forward to get the E-Meter, the one thing we
had to
have.
In Navigation, man bases the whole subject on the assumption that one
can't
confront where he came from or is going or where he is. It assumes he is
lost.
This is a basis assumption of non-confront. He can't directly see where
he has
been or where he is going at sea-it is so large-so he takes off from a
point of
no-confront in all his reasoning in the subject.
Therefore he goes into a series of symbols and begins to substitute
symbols for
symbols. This winds him up in a mass of complexity. One spends 90% of his
time in
studying this subject trying to find out what symbols the symbols are meant
to
represent. He says in his texts "G.H.A." On search we find this means
"Greenwich
Hour Angle". On further search we find this means what angle some heavenly
body
forms when related to Greenwich as Zero. On further search we find the
idiocy that
the navigator's clock tells angles in HOURS when all he needs is a clock
face giving 360
degrees. This is of course complete nonsense. Why hours, and two sets of 12
at that
(midnight to Noon and Noon to midnight) when what he is trying to find out
is how
many degrees of time have passed. He refers his time to the Sun which,
because of the
rotations of Earth every 24 hours, appears at an increasing number of
degrees from
Greenwich England as the day advances.
Because he starts from a no-confront of ship or plane position he then
carries
no-confront through the whole subject. If a man isn't lost as he begins to
"navigate" he
very often is when he finishes!
Actually no ship or plane is ever lost as to position. One knows he is
on Earth and