Oct 28, 1990

I stumbled on this while trying to resolve a life continuum. We've known for a long time that children often try to carry on the valences of relatives who died around them. This is discussed in the Dianetic materials of 1951. Early on, this was considered to be a sort of overt/motivator phenomena with the child blowing a minor overt or postulate to be rid of the person up into the reason for their demise and doing a valence shift.

But let's say that there is a perfect child who does nothing bad with perfect parents with whom he is in great ARC. Now let's say that Ug the barbarian comes riding by with his broadsword and lops the parents' heads off. It would seem to me that this kid is going to do a life continuum. And the critical button is the fact that he failed to protect them.

This is very much like failed help and it will run the same way. This incident could even be considered as an extreme example of failing to help. But these are really two different things and trying to resolve it on failed help might not quite give you the right chain. It's not really hung up on the times he didn't get them a bucket of water when he should have. He's not really worried about that although he'll jump at it to avoid the real failure which was the fact that there was no way in hell that he could have protected these people. These were symboiants and allies of great value and he sure did want them to stay around and he would have given anything to protect them. You'll find that he made the strongest postulate he could to protect them, but he failed. And then he makes his postulate stick the only way he can. He makes his dead ally live on by becoming them himself.

You can't go straight into the teeth of this. Its like failed help, you will have trouble running it directly with a repetitive process. What you do is run the positive aspect and build it up until the weight of what he can protect exceeds the failure and blows out the ridge.

To cure a life continuum, generalize the terminal (e.g. "a father" rather than a specific father etc.) and fit it into the following process.

1. How could you protect a ....
2. How could a ..... protect you
3. How could another protect a .....
4. How could a ..... protect another
5. How could a ..... protect himself/herself

On a more general basis, you can use all of the help processes on grade 1 and reword them with "protect" in place of help. Note that you should run the help processes in their original form first if you haven't done so already since help is a lower gradient, then run the protect version of these processes. On a grades chart these might better fit into the beginning of grade 2 rather than grade 1.

Another thing that happens both with help and protection is that they get enforced and inhibited. There can be quite a bit of charge on this. Ron's bulletin on how help became betrayal is really in this realm rather than in the area of failed help and we haven't really gone hunting it in the current lineup of processes (it might sometimes show up if you get enough charge off). This is a critical area and it should be run. The processes would be as follows:

1. Spot times when you forced another to help you.
2. Spot times when another forced you to help them.
3. Spot times when another forced someone else to help them.
4. Spot times when you forced another to help others.
5. Spot times when another forced you to help others.
6. Spot times when another forced someone else to help others.

7. Spot times when you rejected another's help.
8. Spot times when another rejected your help.
9. Spot times when another rejected other's help.

10. Spot times when you made another wrong for not helping.
11. Spot times when another made you wrong for not helping.
12. Spot times when another made others wrong for not helping.

13. Spot times when you made another wrong for helping.
14. Spot times when another made you wrong for helping.
15. Spot times when another made others wrong for helping.

Then run the same with protect in place of help.

Besides this, there appear to be some between lives implants which use a failed help and failed protect scene for each of the penalty universes. These seem to be used in one of the upper between lives (i.e., between symbol bodies etc.) rather than in the current meat body between lives implants.

Both the failed help and failed protect implants use the terminal that was defined as "This means trouble" in the original penalty universes. In the failed help scene, you are the penalty universe terminal, and you hear a cry for help from another of the same terminals who has been captured by the trouble terminal. I.E., on the goal To Eat, you would be a tiger and would hear the cry of another tiger who has been captured by natives and is being hurt. You try to rush in, but you get stopped in some manner. Although your body doesn't die, you flinch so hard that you snap out of the body and can't bear to re-animate it even though the other terminal is screaming or whatever, and as a result, you fail to help them.

In the failed protect scene, you are the "trouble" terminal. There will be a crowd of some sort of beings that the penalty terminal hurts in the penalty universe. For example, in the goal To Eat, you are the native and there will be a crowd of monkeys who come and beg for your protection against the tiger. Generally they give you something and you agree to protect them. Then the penalty terminal comes in fast and smashes you (i.e. the tiger comes charging in, swats your spear away, and claws you). You feel pain and jump back from the body. Although the body isn't dead, you can't bear to re-enter it and continue fighting. So you float exterior and watch as the penalty terminal does horrible things to the victims you agreed to protect (i.e., you watch the tiger eating all the monkeys).

The failed help and protect scenes will be described in detail for each penalty universe on the full master list since they are easiest to run while running the penalty universes themselves.