No matching fragments found in this document.
therefore the "decisions" are already visible. If a flow stacks up or a
basket fills, or
trouble occurs, we have an overload or an absence or an injected
"individual decision
point".
Far from robbing anyone of self determinism, the 1965 board is welcomed
by
sighs of relief. Even I was glad to get my own work onto it. The whole room
went
bright when I cognited "Gee, this is what everyone is trying to do to me;
make me an
individual decision point!"
One puts one's baskets and one's "hands" into the lines and acts on the
lines. One
doesn't put his decisions on the lines as the lines then hit him! A
postulate or a
decision is too close to a thetan's identity! It confuses him and makes him
feel hit
personally by the Communications when he has to newly decide on each one.
If the
decision is already there, A or B, he can then route with his "hands", not
with himself.
If he is always newly and randomly deciding he gets carried eventually on
down the
comm line himself and goes off post! A thetan can handle a vast volume of
action so
long as he doesn't have to make a strange or fresh decision in each act. We
can tell in
orgs who is making fresh individual decisions as that person has to bring
each of his
own dispatches in personally. (We call it, "bringing a body".) He routes
himself too!
Only a Communication runner who is involved only with who and where can do
this
safely as her decisions are known beforehand. Thus she can move on lines
with
impunity. Note that she only stops when she has to figure out who has now
gone
where and why she was not informed! Otherwise a Communications runner could
go
through fire and war with impunity without a pause so long as the who and
where are
known. Thus an investigation's personnel cannot also be a communications
personnel
without going half mad! But an investigation's personnel with her set of
"who to look
for and where" can move swiftly too! They (the communications personnel and
the
investigations personnel) have entirely different previously known
decisions to make.
Both are who, wheres. But the comm who, where is the comm station of a
known
person. And the investigation who, where is composed of types of whos and
reported
wheres. The purposes are different. The comm personnel sees to whom and
where and
delivers. The investigation personnel sees what and finds out whom and
where and
reports. Other staff must know what decisions these two will make. Other
staff sees a
jam of traffic and will feel comfortable if a Communicator predictably
sends an
expediter to help clear the jam. Also, seeing a confused area, other staff
will feel all
right about it if an investigator pops up and finds out what and whom and
reports it
accurately for a predictable decision. Thus a staff trained in the pattern
of decisions
that will be taken by the various departments only complains when somebody
green
puts somebody else's traffic on their lines or leaps in investigating the
maintenance
men when it's a bulldog a pc brought to session that's howling. Things get
predictable.
One sees a pile of traffic growing, one knows an expediter will show up.
One sees a
student blowing, one knows an investigator will show up. One can live in a
predictable
environment. One gets nervy only in the presence of unpredictable
decisions. Want to
know why wog courts make people nervy? Who can predict a wog court
decision? Who
can even predict the sentence man to man for the same crime? It's not
knowing that
makes men stupid. Part of knowing is "In a given situation what should be
decided?"
Only a new knowledge of universal laws has made it possible to make,
such an org
pattern, for its decisions are then basic in every person and the universe
in which we
live. We need only avoid bank dramatizations to own the lot.
L. RON HUBBARD
LRH:jw.rd
Copyright �1965
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Note: The above Policy Letter was reissued on 13 October 1970 without
change. A revision was issued on 15 December 1972 deleting the first page
and a half. This revision should be studied in conjunction with Policy
Letters on sales closing techniques which appear in the 1972 and 1973 Year
Books.]