False Data Stripping
Using False Data
FDS is a great tool in training and in educating somebody on the job. Many jobs is have a lot of written materials with duties, procedures and know-how which the staff member has to know very well in order to perform efficiently. FDS is a valuable tool, besides word clearing, in getting somebody capable of performing.
FDS can be done as a metered activity or it can be done without a Meter. It can be done in a formal session or it can be done by the instructor in the course room or by a ST level 0 graduate.
It is a fairly simple procedure. You need to know your basic auditing and know this issue. You should have a formal check-out and drill the procedure before attempting it. If you do it with a Meter, you need to have passed the Meter Course or ST 0 on metering.
Come off in Layers
It will be found that false data come off little by little.
You can have a student, that handled some false data concerning a particular drill and it appears it is all out of the way. He happily goes on with his studies and does good progress for a while. Then at some point things seem to slow down or he runs into difficulties again. This is usually because more false or conflicting data are beginning to surface. The drilling or study has restimulated them. As the student gets more familiar with a subject or action new areas get activated or restimulated. This can happen several times as he gets further and further into a subject.
Thus it can be necessary to redo the FDS and get off these new and deeper layers of false or conflicting data.
It can be repeated as often as necessary on any specific area. Finally all these old data will be handled and the student is capable of understanding and doing the subject in its own right and free of these old or wrong ideas.
There is a philosophical background why it is necessary to get off false data in a field, and why it is very difficult to teach somebody something over false data. The Greek philosopher, Socrates, (470 B.C. - 399 B.C.) formulated the famous formula about thesis * anti-thesis * synthesis.
The Thesis is a statement or view.
The Anti-thesis is an opposing statement or view.
In a formal debate
Socrates used this to describe a debate. You had the one party stating a certain view or statement. The other party would state an opposing view or statement. According to Socrates this would bring about a new idea: the synthesis. This is used in formal logic up to modern times. It works well in debate. When things are discussed in depth they can usually be sorted out. In training, old uninspected ideas can have some disastrous consequences.
If a person has learned a false thesis (or datum), the true datum becomes the anti- thesis. The true datum gets up against the false datum and hangs up there. This happens on a sub-conscious level.
In other words, the two data collide and none of
them will make sense. You don't necessary get a synthesis. You can
simply end up with two data in opposition and conflict. The datum the
student is trying to learn is in plain view. The other is an old and
sort of hidden datum that can generate all kinds of troubles in his
In study (and life)
You can end up with:
(1) An attempt to use a false, unworkable synthesis, the student has formed, or
(2) his ability to think in the area is being prevented.
In both cases you get a student it is impossible to get through a subject or impossible to train on the job.
There is a thing known as a 'glib student'. It is a student who can repeat everything verbatim and yet can't demonstrate any practical ability in a subject. It is all glib memorizing with little or no real understanding.
His basic understanding and participation is blocked by a consideration like 'nothing works anyway, but I can at least get a pass and please the professor'.
The less a person can confront, the more false data he is likely to accumulate. The 'syntheses' usually adds up to complexities and the person has now a very complex subject to deal with. He has a battle in his mind between false data and true data and an inability to determine which is which. Result: he seems really dumb and incapable in the subject.
To be able to have a teachable student, you need to cure him from all these complexities and additives. The fist thing is of course to find and clear misunderstood words. But often this isn't enough. It is also necessary to find and strip the false data off a subject. Most of the time, these false data will be earlier in time than the true data. They are more basic in his reactive mind or memory. By locating them and stripping them away the whole subject can suddenly open up and now be understood.
Open to False Data
Some students are more prone to accept false data than others. This stems from harmful acts committed prior to accepting the false data. The false data is made into becoming a justifier for the harmful act.
Example: A student is doing a poor job studying. He goes past misunderstood words in the subject, he cheats at exams and finally he drops the subject completely. Then somebody comes along and says that the subject is useless and destructive. He will immediately hold on to this datum or view as it helps him justify his earlier wrong actions related to the subject. He will use this view as a 'make wrong'.
If you see somebody who is very prone to accept false data in a certain area or subject, the answer is to check him out for and get him to tell any prior withholds and harmful acts he has committed in relation to the subject. With those out of the way the person is less prone to accept any false data in the future.
It is not always possible to detect false data by simply asking for them. After all, the person thinks of them as true.
Therefore you have to approach it a little differently: You ask if there is anything in the subject under discussion, that he couldn't think with, which didn't seem to add up or seems to be in conflict with the materials he is trying to study.
The false data themselves tend to stay buried and out of sight. The approach above will however locate them indirectly. When a false datum has been located, it is handled with a basic Recall Process. Even though Recall is a very light process, it can be very powerful. It strings the student's attention directly to the incident, where the false datum was received and it will blow. He is made to recall the datum and the circumstances under which he received or accepted that datum. Doing that, he can now sort out the confusion rationally.
A. The first step is to determine if the student needs this procedure. Look at these factors:
1. The person doesn't seem to understand the on-the-job training or can't be educated on a subject.
2. No crashing misunderstood words can be found in the subject. Yet from the symptoms they are probably there.
3. The person is not duplicating and understanding the material he has studied or he is incapable of applying them correctly even after word clearing on the materials.
4. He is rejecting the data he is learning or the definitions of words being cleared.
5. The person has studied earlier materials on the subject at hand, that could contain incorrect data. (Like psychology prior to ST).
6. He quotes such sources repeatedly and has a hard time with data at hand.
7. He is glib.
8. The student is afraid of actually applying the data, even after word clearing.
9. He is bogged.
10. He can't think with the data.
B. Find out what materials the student can't grasp or apply. The materials must be at hand. He must have some familiarity with these data, of course.
C. If it is done as a metered action, you need to adjust the sensitivity with the can squeeze drill.
D. If the FDS is given for the first time, you need to clear the idea of false data with him. Have him give examples to ensure he gets it.
E. The below questions are used to uncover the false data. They need to be cleared before asked. They won't necessary read on the Meter as they wouldn't read on something the person holds to be true.
You clear and ask these questions (1-14), one at the time. When one of them uncovers false data you go on to the handling step (F) below.
1. "Is there anything you have run across in (subject) which you couldn't think with?"
2. "Is there anything you have encountered in (subject) which didn't seem to add up?"
3. "Is there something you have come across in (subject) that seems to be in conflict with the material you are trying to learn?"
4. "Is there something in (subject) which never made any sense to you?"
5. "Did you come across any data in (subject) that you had no use for?"
6. "Was there any data you came across in (subject) that never seemed to fit in?"
7. "Do you know of any datum that makes it unnecessary for you to do a good job on this subject?"
8. "Do you know of any reason why an overt product is alright?"
9. "Would you be made wrong if you really learned this subject?"
10. "Did anyone ever explain this subject to you verbally?"
11. "Do you know of any datum that conflicts with standard texts on this subject?"
12. "Do you consider you really know best about this subject?"
13. "Would it make somebody else wrong not to learn this subject?
14. "Is this subject not worth learning?"
F. When the student gives an answer to one of these questions, you locate the false datum:
1. Ask: "Have you been given any false data regarding this?" You help him locate the false datum. If metered, you can use Meter reads and steering. You may have to get him to look around a bit; after all, he may see them as true. Keep going until you find the false datum.
If student gives you a false datum above (step E), you go ahead to G, the handling.
G. When the false datum has been found, ask the following:
1. Ask: "Where did this datum come from?" (Could be a book, person, web, TV, etc.)
2. "When was this?"
3. "Where exactly were you at the time?"
4. "Where was (book, person, etc.) at the time?"
5. "What were you doing at the time?"
6. If the source was a person ask: "what was (the person) doing at the time?"
7. "How did (book, person, etc.) look at the time?"
8. If the datum has not blown with the above questions ask:
"Is there an earlier similar false datum or incident on (subject)?" and handle per Steps 1-7.
Continue with these steps (including E/S) until the false datum has blown. If metered, the student should be F/N VGI.
You do not continue past, where the false datum blows.
If you suspect it may have blown, but the student hasn't said so, ask: "How does that datum seem to you now?". He should tell you if it is still there. If so, you continue the steps until blown.
H. When you have handled one false datum to a blow per (G) above. You would go back to the detection step (E) and ask the hot question again. If there are more answers to that question, you proceed with the location/handling steps (F/G). You keep going until no more answers on that question. Then you go down the detection questions list to find more.
At some point the student may feel the whole subject has been cleared. That would of course be the EP for FDS on the subject. If he feels he can duplicate and apply the data, that's it!
I. If the student is being given FDS as part of crashing misunderstood word finding, you should go ahead with the crashing MU action now.
J. After session send the student to Examiner (if available).
K. Have the student study or restudy the subject that was handled.
When the above is done fully on an area the person had difficulties with, he will end up being able to duplicate, understand and apply and think with the data. The false data will have been cleared away and the person's thinking is freed up. When this happens, no matter where in the procedure, you end off the FDS on that subject. He will have cognitions and VGIs and on the Meter you will have an F/N. This is not the end all of FDS for that person. It is the end of that FDS at that particular time. As the student continues to work with and study that subject, he will learn more about it and may again collide with false data at which time one can repeat the above process.
A student's faith or respect for a certain author or source of information can sometimes make it hard for him to see any false data coming from that source.
It takes persistence and cunning on the part of the FDS'er to get around this sometimes, but it pays off.
Misunderstoods and FDS
Misunderstood words can often turn up during an FDS session. They should simply be cleared when they do and you just continue with FDS. It can tie in with false data in different ways and shouldn't be ignored.
As mentioned in the beginning, false data often come off in layers. If the student has repeated difficulties with some materials or a drill, you would simply continue (repeat) the FDS on the area. There will most likely be more false data available to be picked up.
FDS and Auditing
FDS is done under the rules of auditing. But under normal circumstances it does not need C/S OK.
If somebody is upset, critical or worried, it means ruds are out and ruds should be handled first.
Don't push it beyond 'Datum blown'. That is the EP you are going for. Keep it light and don't overrun.
There is a FDS Repair list, which is used if the action bogs or goes wrong. It has to be done by a qualified auditor. It includes different handlings, including 'dating and locating to a blow', which should only be attempted by auditors trained in this.
On a beginning course, it is usually the instructor that will use the FDS on a student in need for it. If he has an advanced student around, he can tell him to do FDS on other students - if he has studied and drilled the procedure.
FDS is a great additional tool in training. It is a supplement to word clearing. It should be done after word clearing on the subject is completed.