To what degree is the e-meter responding to actual mental phenomena?

[TheSneakster]

Nah, I know that. And you are correct that you could wipe the floor with my auditing experience, yours is certainly far greater.

I have never claimed I was a Classed auditor (beyond HQS). I helped make auditors in the ASHO Foundation St. Hill Special Briefing Course, and it seemed prudent to study as much of the materials as I could to be a useful resource to the students for technical references and what have you.

I don't feel like revealing my specific training and processing info.

You made a claim about what the e-meter reads on, so it is reasonable for me to want to know what e-meter specific training you had.

The Professional TRs and Metering Course was a prerequisite for Academy Levels and the St. Hill Special Briefing Course. But, any other training and processing information is quite irrelevant to your e-meter training and I did not ask about them.

 

[haiqu]

The Professional TRs and Metering Course was a prerequisite for Academy Levels and the St. Hill Special Briefing Course. But, any other training and processing information is quite irrelevant to your e-meter training and I did not ask about them.

It would depend on the era in which Karakorum was trained. The course you mention came long after my training was finished.

 

[TheSneakster]

It would depend on the era in which Karakorum was trained. The course you mention came long after my training was finished.

Sure, that is true, @haiqu. But, so far as I am aware, ever since The Book of E-Meter Drills was released, there has always been a training requirement to do the full set to hard pass before being considered qualified to operate an E-Meter.

 

[haiqu]

In my case, the meter drills were done as part of the HDC, and later the HPWCC. The final pass involved a Qual OK.

SO members often skipped these requirements, using the "read it, drill it, do it" shortcut.

As a certified Ethics Specialist I still wouldn't dream of trying to pull O/Ws on a meter without doing Class II training.

 

[TheSneakster]

As a certified Ethics Specialist I still wouldn't dream of trying to pull O/Ws on a meter without doing Class II training.

Yeah, but I reckon you actually believe in "all auditing is for the benefit of the preclear". Neither would you ever dream of violating HCOB 2 Jan 1971 Illegal Auditing which High Crime out-Tech practice David "Darth Midget" Miscavige personally institutionalized from the top down.

Lists of withholds required of a crew member or staff member without proper
sessioning are now illegal.

Confessionals which do not F/N must be reported to Qual as a failed session.

An Exam report is required after any Confessional.

Any auditing outside of sessions must be reported and if failed may become
actionable.

Challenging people out of session as “having withholds” is illegal.

Auditing is done by auditors who are trained and is done on regular lines.

Contact Assists and Touch Assists are not only legal, they are mandatory when
any injury occurs.

They must be followed by Exam reports.

 

[The_Fixer]

The best use for the E-meter is in diagnosing electrical circuits, kinda tells you if the connections are good.

Taking Scientology training courses for it is kind of a long way around to be learning to be a electrical technician.

All that aside, I've read a few bits and pieces around the place saying the meter isn't all that hard to beat. You just got to have a little rhythm with the hands on the cans and try not to get seen doing so by the meter reader...

 

[haiqu]

All that aside, I've read a few bits and pieces around the place saying the meter isn't all that hard to beat. You just got to have a little rhythm with the hands on the cans and try not to get seen doing so by the meter reader...

Like most of the denizens of the internet, you're missing the point entirely. A meter isn't there to punish anyone, it's there simply to find something to look at, with the potential that the found item can be discharged and lead to relief. Why anyone would purposely fuck up their own case by manipulating the cans is beyond me.

 

[Isaac]

What needle phenomena does a fart register on the Emeter?

 

[Howard Dickman]

The e-meter is basically a sensitive ohm meter, which measures resistance. I am unable to understand how a body would react during the assessment of an auditing list when an instant read occurs. Is the brain capable of, 1. receiving the communication, 2. processing what was said, and then sending the signal to the skin to react immediately after the auditing list item had been delivered.

I've used the e-meter to direct the PC towards a repressed memory many successful times. I've physically seen the auditing room darken and then grow brighter as I audited the PC on R3R. All I know is that by using the e-meter my PC's had wins.

 

[onceuponatime]

Relying on the meter as an infallible lie-detecting tool for interrogations is pure foolishness. Everyone with enough ethics experience knows this, regardless if they admit it openly or not.

Yup, it isn't something spoken of too openly but I'm sure experienced auditors and C/Ses don't really believe in the meter either. I have heard of some instances where a PC was being sec-checked, nothing comes up (verified on video), but the auditor or C/S didn't believe it so they investigated it using other avenues. Surprise surprise, the meter was wrong. The PC had actually been out-2D or whatever. In my opinion the meter working or not depends to a large degree on whether the person on the cans believes in it. If someone experienced is trying to beat the meter, they can and will.

 

[haiqu]

From the theory section of the CB-Meter manual, which I'm supplying with my meters:

"The working of the meter is similar to one of the methods of measurement used in a polygraph, a lie
detector. However, it isn't ideal for measuring truth and falseness, in that these are very relative
issues. It shows mental stress in an area, there is really no evaluation of good/bad, truth/lie. The
truth that the meter can register is what is true, relatively, for the client. If he considers stealing bad
and he has stolen something, then it would register on the meter if we asked about it. But, if he
couldn't care less, then it wouldn't show anything."

There is no such thing as a Lie Detector. And nobody expected the Spanish Inquisition.

 

[TheSneakster]

From the theory section of the CB-Meter manual, which I'm supplying with my meters:

"The working of the meter is similar to one of the methods of measurement used in a polygraph, a lie
detector. However, it isn't ideal for measuring truth and falseness, in that these are very relative
issues. It shows mental stress in an area, there is really no evaluation of good/bad, truth/lie. The
truth that the meter can register is what is true, relatively, for the client. If he considers stealing bad
and he has stolen something, then it would register on the meter if we asked about it. But, if he
couldn't care less, then it wouldn't show anything."

There is no such thing as a Lie Detector. And nobody expected the Spanish Inquisition.

Just a wee note: the psychogalvanometer (class of thing to which the e-meter belongs) predates the polygraph by at least two decades. The polygraph was fraudulently sold as reliable lie detection device from its first inception.

These overly complex instruments aren't allowed in any court of law in the U.S. or Europe. Now they only used by security companies to charge corporate HR departments exorbitant sums for completely false reports as to the trustworthiness of personnel prospects.

 

[Zertel]

In my auditor training in the 1970's I don't recall learning to use the meter as difficult. In introductory auditing like Self Analysis on the cans and dianetic auditing which came before the grades back then probably 95%+ of what I was looking at on the meter were reads (needle falls) and floating needles. If a session went bad a higher classed auditor could correct it with a correction list. I was an interned dianetic auditor and training and co-auditing on the levels when I split scn so maybe learning to do the correction lists required more intensive meter training but I didn't go that far.

For example, on the Dianetic Drug Rundown you ask the person what drugs they have used and write them down on a list. Some of them read on the meter which you note as they are given and some of them don't. You start with the best reading drug and go from there. Simple

My comment is old stuff to the people here but it's a public thread so maybe a non scn might be interested. Hubbard made most of his money from selling training and auditing so the more auditors he had the more auditing he could sell. Training was simplified back then.

 

[lotus]

Samething in the 80's on the e-meter course.

 

[TheSneakster]

In my auditor training in the 1970's I don't recall learning to use the meter as difficult.

Oh, didn't realized you had metered auditing training.

So were you able to reliably pass E-Meter drill 22 (Hidden Date, this lifetime) ? Just curious.

 

[TheSneakster]

All that aside, I've read a few bits and pieces around the place saying the meter isn't all that hard to beat. You just got to have a little rhythm with the hands on the cans and try not to get seen doing so by the meter reader...

Only an incompetent auditor with total fail levels of training on the TRs (TR-0 in particular) and the E-Meter Drills can be deceived that way. Of course, that certainly applies to all almost current Org HCO staff doing "meter checks" or "HCO Confessionals".

 

[Zertel]

Oh, didn't realized you had metered auditing training.

So were you able to reliably pass E-Meter drill 22 (Hidden Date, this lifetime) ? Just curious.

Too long ago for me to remember exactly what meter training I did. It might have even been part of the Dianetic Auditor Course. There was no need for an R3R dianetic auditor to know date and locate or listing and nulling procedures and so on. That was the job of a scn auditor. There was that distinction between the two back then. Best I recall.

 

[Zertel]

In my case, the meter drills were done as part of the HDC, and later the HPWCC. The final pass involved a Qual OK.

SO members often skipped these requirements, using the "read it, drill it, do it" shortcut.

As a certified Ethics Specialist I still wouldn't dream of trying to pull O/Ws on a meter without doing Class II training.

It seems that in different time periods different requirements for different courses were added or dropped. I guess DM requires you read a whole friggin library before you even start auditor training. Lol
(Or do you just need to buy the library first? I don't know.)

You mention HDC which would be the Hubbard Dianetics Course. Above I called it the Dianetic Auditor Course but that was a guess and I believe you are correct.

 

[Karakorum]

I have never claimed I was a Classed auditor (beyond HQS). I helped make auditors in the ASHO Foundation St. Hill Special Briefing Course, and it seemed prudent to study as much of the materials as I could to be a useful resource to the students for technical references and what have you.



You made a claim about what the e-meter reads on, so it is reasonable for me to want to know what e-meter specific training you had.

The Professional TRs and Metering Course was a prerequisite for Academy Levels and the St. Hill Special Briefing Course. But, any other training and processing information is quite irrelevant to your e-meter training and I did not ask about them.

I did both pro TRs, pro uper indoc TRs, pro metering course and a few academy levs above that.

But still out of the vast ocean of hours I spent messing with people using the meter, more than 95% started with the infamous words: "I am not auditing you".

Again, all part of being at inv. All about digging in the files, gathering evidence and interrogations.

Confessionals which do not F/N must be reported to Qual as a failed session

That's the thing that either Hubbard missed, or he just didn't care. I personally had ran people on the meter and I asked them directly "did you do X" when I knew they did it, because I had CCTV footage of them doing it.
And you know what? some of them lied to my face and still got a F/N.

There are absolutely some people who will just lie their ass off on the meter and you never get any read.

Then there are terrified 100% honest people who will tell you the whole truth and you will get a bunch of random reads... just because they were in a state of panic.

People who tried to do interrogations based only on the meter would fail and were entirely useless as investigators. The meter alone would almost never get you to the truth. You had to observe the accountable unit for physical reactions, changes in their tone and sometimes just flat out shower them with tons of questions for many hours and then compare notes looking for inconsistencies. And then of course all the work with files and recordings and evidence, KRs and witness accounts...

Even with all that... I'm sure there were people who lied so well that they fell through the cracks and we never got them.

There were moments when as a teenager I was on the receiving end of a confessional, during which I lied or retained withholds and they never caught me.

 

[The_Fixer]

Like most of the denizens of the internet, you're missing the point entirely. A meter isn't there to punish anyone, it's there simply to find something to look at, with the potential that the found item can be discharged and lead to relief. Why anyone would purposely fuck up their own case by manipulating the cans is beyond me.

Oh don't mind me, I'm just engaging in a little tomfoolery here.

My point was actually referring to things like sec checks where some people actually knew how to bypass certain things just to get through the day, if you get my meaning. Some people in the cult actually knew what they would be in for if they got a reading, so they figured out how to work things in their favour. Smarter options.

In an actual session though, you do have my agreement.