Knowledge vs. Knowingness: Knowledge is recorded in mental MEST, for instance a known principle that can be communicated. These axioms are an example. Knowledge is constructed in the mind based on observation and conclusion. Thus, knowledge concerns things already in existence, agreements already made. It can be found in the sciences, life experience, stable data etc.
Knowingness is ”pure thought”, i.e. does not exist as mental MEST, We particularly use the word in two meanings: 1. A mere potential to know something, i.e. to find out about something not yet known. 2. Something one has come to know through experience, but which is not represented as mental MEST because it has been thoroughly understood, which causes all mechanical conditions to vanish (Axiom 24).
Life static: A thetan’s “native” or primordial state.
It’s the most basic state of a thetan, in which he has no association with neither mental or physical MEST, no beingness and no space.
See Axiom 1.
Lock: An incident which is not in itself stressful, but which restimulated an engram chain and so causes discomfort to a person. Because of this association with the chain, the incident is added to the chain.
Mechanics, mechanical: Any structure, function, machinery etc. involving matter, energy, space & time, whether physical or mental
MEST (noun), MESTy (adjective): short for Matter, Energy, Space & Time. These include objects, forms (e.g. geometrical shape, chemical characteristics and life forms), location, duration, points in time, actions, processes etc.
The term is used to signify the physical universe or things physical, depending on the context.
By extension, it is also used to signify mental image pictures, mock-us, facsimiles and other mental phenomena which can be perceived by the senses of the mind but are not usually considered to be physical in nature.
Particularly, MEST is often used to signify content of the reactive mind, i.e. aberration, which is considered to be particularly heavy or solid MEST.
The adjective MESTy is often used to signify that something is based on aberration. A MESTy person would have many engram chains keyed in and be very aberrated.
Mental Image Picture. A mental image or picture, memory, representation etc. composed of mental matter, energy, space, time, location and form, which is to say: It can be perceived by the inner eye, ear, nose etc., no matter how vaguely.
The two major classes of mental image pictures are facsimiles, which are recordings of events that have occurred on a time continuum, and mockups, which are images created, i.e. imagined or invented, knowingly by the thetan.
Mental MEST: see MEST
Mind The mind is a communication and control system between the thetan and his environment.
It is usually subdivided into
the analytical mind, which thinks rationally, perceives relevant similarities and differences, evaluates and concludes. The thetan is aware of and self-determined about this mind.
the reactive mind, which is automatic and ”thinks” in identities, reacting in the same way to a lot of different things (persons, locations, scents, sounds etc.) which by an engram chain have been fused together into one solid mass
the somatic mind, which simply refers to the body with its control systems, its needs and impulses etc. It is seen as having a mind of its own.
These three minds are all mechanical.
The thetan is capable of making decisions, evaluating, solving problems and creating. He can do anything that a mind can do, but he does not necessarily do it by using mechanics, machinery, mental MEST etc. It can think without mocking the thinking up in mental MEST.
Minus randomity: see randomity
Mock-up (noun), mock up (verb): A knowingly and deliberately created mental image picture. It is not a recording of a real occurrence – which would be a facsimile – but a self-determined new creation.
It can be similar to physical reality, but may also be in complete disagreement with it. In our minds, we can be free, fly, walk through walls or imagine a perfect community...
Ron sometimes (but not always) distinguishes mock-ups from imagination, which is then understood as a mere idea that is not represented mentally. A mock-up is always perceivable to the senses of the mind. Its mass, color, solidity etc. may be very flimsy, indeed, but it always has a location in relationship to the person. He can at least be sure that it’s in his stomach, somewhere behind his left shoulder, close to his heart etc. But if he says, ”Imagine having a million dollars” and just gets a pleasant emotion but no location or image, it’s not a mock-up.
Motivator: see Overt-Motivators, O/Ws
Negative case gain: Case gains achieved by running out mental MEST, as different from exercising the person’s native abilities (positive case gain).
Nonsequitur: that does not follow logically from the premises; that has no bearing on the matter at hand.
In Scientology, it particularly applies to
aberrated actions, which may have been understandable and made sense in situations in which one received engrams, secondaries or locks, but which are not appropriate in the present situation. The actions of the aberrated person are often nonsequitur, i.e. crazy or illogical.
cognitions gotten in session which do not relate to the process run, but most likely to another subject matter activated e.g. by a facsimile the pc recalls or by external factors. For example, a chain may be crossing the chain being run, and the crossing chain may have keyed out, while the first chain may still be keyed in. Thus the end phenomena are nonsequitur to the process, which still needs to be run. In processes that only aim to key the person out, such as a prepcheck, a nonsequitur end phenomenon can be good enough, because the pc, being happy, is obviously not severely bothered by the button being run.
Not-is-ness (noun), not-is (verb): An attempt to suppress, push away or hide something so it ceases to exist, becomes smaller, seems more insignificant or is hidden.
A thing that is not-ised is not easily perceived, but manifests instead as inexplicable phenomena, such as crazy impulses, body pains, unwarranted (bad) emotions etc. It is what causes aberrations mechanically (rather that by consideration, false information etc.). Cf. Axiom 18.
Generally speaking, not-is-ness can be of the following kinds:
DAX 161: THE CONTROL CENTER [ed.: the thetan] ATTEMPTS THE HALTING OR LENGTHENING OF TIME, THE EXPANSION OR CONTRACTION OF SPACE AND THE DECREASE OR INCREASE OF ENERGY AND MATTER.
This is a primary source of invalidation, and it is also a primary source of aberration.
Noumenon (noun, plural: noumena), noumenal (adjective): As Ron uses the term, it means things and events happening no matter what we believe or opine about them.
If the brakes fail down a steep hill, the car will accelerate no matter how hard the driver believes or postulates that they are in good condition.
Likewise, Scientology techniques (correctly applied) will produce the expected results whether the auditor and pc believe it or not. The Scientology basics describe noumenal principles.
Cf. the cannonball phenomenon described under Axiom 8.
O/Ws: Abbr. for Overt-Withholds
Old cuff: Short note made to remember an interesting idea, realization etc. The term originates from the idea of writing on one's cuff when paper is not available.
Operating Thetan, abbr.: O.T.: A thetan capable of operating without a body. Many unusual and supernatural abilities have been associated with this state.
On the 1970 Classification and Gradation Chart the state attained at OT VIII is defined this way:
ABILITY TO BE AT CAUSE KNOWINGLY AND AT WILL OVER THOUGHT, LIFE, FORM, MATTER, ENERGY, SPACE AND TIME, SUBJECTIVE AND OBJECTIVE.
These are rather god-like qualities. From a more practical viewpoint, O.T. begins just over 2.0 on The Tone Scale (Professional Auditors Bulletin 101, Tech. Vol., pages 556-558). To the degree that you can be aware that you are yourself, i.e. an awareness unit, even if inside a body, you have begun to operate as a thetan. If you can rise enough above a situation to see it in its proper perspective, you are taking a theta (or thetan’s) viewpoint (cf. Axiom 48, 49).
Many individuals, not only Scientologists, have experienced being exterior (outside the body). In this state, many have thought they saw or heard something that then turned out not to be true in the physical universe – it “wasn’t really true”. Ron warned against this: A pc should never, never, never judge what he experiences while exterior with what occurs in physical MEST. The invalidations may ruin the state and make progress more difficult. In time, he may become able to perceive correctly, perhaps, but, at first, this is an impossible gradient, because we are so used to having to adjust to physical reality.
You should not miss the incredible case gains you can have by experiencing – in your own universe – to be exterior, free of the body, magically moving things around to your liking or just for the fun of finding that you can. What you experience in your own universe truly does exist, even if it exists only for you.
What you experience in one universe does not have to make sense in another; you may find opinions and attitudes in your mother’s mind that you won’t find in your father’s. You would not try to change your dreams and fantasies to make them accord with state of the art theories about the brain; the theories are incomplete or wrong if they don’t agree with (cannot account for) what you or others imagine or mock up.
I don’t know how far growth in your own personal universe may take you, but I know how you can wreck the fun before you have even begun.
Opinion: see postulate
Optimum randomity: see randomity
OT abilities: Abilities, normally considered to be supernatural, of which an advanced operating thetan is assumed to be capable, including ability to move physical objects without using a body, mocking up matter etc. For instance, he might mock up a body that can act and be perceived by others as a physical human body like any other.
Many advanced Scientology O.T.s report that they haven’t such abilities. See Operating Thetan.
Other-determinism, other-determined. See determinism
Overt, see Overt-Motivators, O/Ws
Overt-motivators, O/Ws. An overt or overt act is a harmful act. More precisely, it does more harm on the eight dynamics overall than it does good. Destruction is sometimes necessary, but can be outweighed by the good it causes. An operation, for example, destroys body tissue but can save a life.
A motivator is a destructive act done to oneself. It can seem to justify an overt toward the person doing it (see DED). Feeling justified to harm another simply because he has harmed oneself, is aberrated. The basic urge of life being survival or (good) existence, the important thing is to create the best possible future on all dynamics, not to make one person on one dynamic feel bad, too.
How one should respond to a motivator is a question, rather, of whether one can make the other guy repair the damage or turn him into a symbiote, or maybe one has to restrain his actions in order to prevent him from pursuing his destructive goals – which is not a destructive action with the intention of repaying the motivator.
Giving another person engrams, locks or secondaries makes for an impoverished future. Good control – not hate, sympathy, forgiveness or sweetness and light – makes for a greater game.
Man is basically good, but when aberrated he will commit overts, because he doesn’t understand what is happening (Axiom 24). He basically dislikes this and may fear retribution, and so he begins to be secretive and withhold the fact that he did it; eventually he will also withhold himself from action so that he won’t commit more overts; as a matter of fact, inaction can be very destructive, too.
Overts and withholds manifest by a person being critical, unwilling to act etc.
The cycle of an overt and ”the O/W scale” from independent (free) being to self-criticism is discussed under Axiom 29.
Pan-determinism, pan-determined: See determinism
Pc: abbreviation for preclear
Plus randomity: see randomity
Positive case gain: Case gains attained by exercising a person’s native abilities, as different from running out mental MEST, aberration (negative case gain).
Postulate: a creative intention by a thetan, e.g. getting an idea, a thought, deciding to do something, drawing a conclusion etc.
The decision to do something, making a plan etc. always begins with a postulate, but a postulate needs not to have any consequence beyond its own creation – one doesn’t necessarily act on it.
On the other hand, one can act directly without first thinking about it or ordering oneself to do it. Such actions are postulated directly.
In Axiom 2, two special kinds of postulates are defined:
A consideration is a continuing postulate, it has duration. A postulate without duration does not exist on a time continuum and ceases to exist the moment it is no longer created. A postulate initiating a Cycle of Action automatically exists on the time continuum postulated by that cycle.
An opinion is a postulate about something postulated, which is not changed by this postulate. E.g. its beauty, ugliness, goodness or badness (cf. Axiom 31). A painting isn’t physically changed by the opinions of those who observe it.
Preclear abbr. pc: Person receiving Scientology auditing. A client. The term is also loosely used to signify a pre-OT.
Pre-OT: A clear being processed on the OT- levels, i.e. the part of the bridge above the state of Clear.
Prepcheck (noun, verb), abbr: prepx: Auditing action done to destimulate and key out a pc on a certain subject, person or period, e.g. ”recently” etc.
It consists of a series of buttons: ”On (subject, person etc.) has anything been suppressed?”, ”... is there anything you’ve been careful of”, ”... didn’t reveal?” etc.
Each button is taken to an end phenomenon (floating needle, cognition, very good indicators).
Pressed-down fives (or sevens): Slang for engram chains that cause a person to think, emote or act, perceive, emote etc. or not in fixed patterns determined by engramic content.
Randomity, plus randomity, minus randomity, optimum randomity: Randomity is synonymous with confusion. It can be too much, too little or just right.
The degree of randomity is determined by the ratio between what cannot be predicted (which is therefore confusing) and what can be. Sanity is dependent on the ability to predict events and thus be able to control them. An acceptable rate of change produces optimum randomity. When a person experiences optimum randomity, things are neither extremely stressful, nor very boring.
DAX 81: SANITY CONSISTS OF OPTIMUM RANDOMITY
Cf. Axiom 54.
DAX 74: OPTIMU7M RANDOMITY IS NECESSARY TO LEARNING.
When confusion becomes too great – too random to predict or handle – plus randomity results. This is a condition of extreme stress, and burnout or a psychotic break may follow. When plus randomity is extreme, it becomes an engram.
When confusion becomes too predictable and controllable, boredom results. This, too, can become extreme enough to become an engram.
If you read the Axioms of Dianetics (abbr. DAX in this text), you can read plus or minus randomity as synonymous with engrams (ref. DAX 94).
Reactive mind: see mind
Reality (noun), real (adjective): Anything which a person considers to exist. By this consideration, he implicitly agrees to its existence.
The way we use the word, it sometimes refers specifically to physical MEST, which was the original meaning of the term. But at other times it is used to mean anything that is real to a person, whether agreed upon by others or not. “It’s real to me!” It could be personal opinions, views, convictions etc. Fairies may be real to him but not to anybody he knows. Some of his aberrated ideas probably are not agreed upon by others.
We sometimes use the terms “reality” and “actuality” to distinguish between subjective and objective MEST: Reality is that which is broadly agreed upon, while actuality is what is real only to the person himself. Ron doesn’t use the terms quite consistently, but the meaning is usually clear by the context.
Note that a person can consider something to be real (objective), not just actual (subjective), even though others have not agreed to it yet. He was the first to discover a new island, say, but he knows others will agree that it exists once they arrive there.
Rehabilitation (noun), rehabilitate (verb): The act or process of recovering an ability or awareness that one had in the past, but which has been lost. It happens regularly during auditing and sometimes in life.
Note that a cognition is not a rehabilitation, it is new knowledge, a new realization about something that happened in the past. Also the procedure for recovering of an EP from a process already run.
Restimulation: see Key-in
Restimulator: a thing, person, action, word etc. that restimulates (activates) an engram chain.
Ron: Short of L. Ron Hubbard, the creator of Dianetics and Scientology and founder of the Church of Scientology and earlier organizations.
Rudiments: Processes given, if necessary, at the start of a session to handle distractions in life and ensure that the pc can give the main subject his full attention in the session.
Today, they consist of handling any ARC breaks, present time problems and missed withholds present before a session start.
Scientologist: Person practicing Scientology, whether as auditor, preclear or student, because he has realized that it can produce worthwhile effects in life.
Scientology: A philosophy including an empirically based technology designed to liberate the individual from being controlled by other-determinisms.
It works by keying out or erasing engram chains and exercising the abilities of the thetan. This makes the person capable of becoming more and more self-determined, increases his abilities and enables him to make sane decisions in his life.
The two characteristics that perhaps most sets Scientology apart from other systems of therapy or personal development are: 1. We don’t try to change (alter-is or not-is) undesirable thoughts, emotions, habits etc. or bring them under control, but make them vanish by as-is-ness, and 2. Processing (auditing, “treatment”) almost exclusively relies on how things appear to the preclear and how he figures out for himself, without suggestions or promptings, what to think and believe, Scientology is not entirely unique in this latter characteristic, but it probably practices it more consistently that any other system.
Secondary: A facsimile containing loss or threat of loss, resulting in grief or any other strong emotion. It’s an aberrative facsimile only because it has been associated with an earlier engram with similar content (called the basic or basic engram of the chain).
Self-determinism, self-determined: see determinism
Service facsimile, abbr. Ser. Fac.: A computation that is used as a default solution when one is incapable of solving a critical situation rationally.
The basic service facsimile on a case is typically formed within the first two years of life, where the individual is incapable of comprehending complex situations. The baby or toddler got over a severe crisis, but wrongly figured it was because of something he did, and he decided this was the way to get out of incomprehensible crises – situations that he couldn’t analyze, understand and deal with effectively. And he has used this solution ever since, when he didn’t understand a situation, irrationally and without being able to give any sensible explanation for it. He can be very emphatic about it, though, very assertive and even violent.
A service facsimile is not a facsimile, strictly speaking, since the computation has been detached from the time track. It will be characterized by one of three dichotomies: right – wrong, dominate – escape domination or survive – succumb. Thus a service facsimile may be used to make another wrong, make oneself right (whether one is or isn’t), to dominate another etc.
The computation itself is not unknown to the person, but he is not rational about it. He will often word it, or a part of it, typically with particular thrust – he blurts it out, often in anger or lament, because a child under two cannot well explain his needs. Crying is his most workable tool to get out of situations he cannot handle himself. It will bring him sympathy and in fact often get him out of trouble.
Since the child didn’t have much language, it’s not surprising that the adult pc cannot itsa a ser. fac.; the pc cannot tell you much about it. It’s a ”glum area”. It’s run as a standard action on Grade IV.
It is of course absolutely meaningless to indicate to a person that he is ”service-facy”. He doesn’t know and won’t understand. Nevertheless, some people feel very right or superior by doing so, but that is due to their service fac.
Static: see life static
Supervisor: see case supervisor
Thetan – operating thetan (OT), theta clear, thetan exterior: A thetan is a life static, defined in Axiom 1. It’s the person himself, not his body, his mind or his self (which is a creation made according to what he considers himself to be. It is who an auditor audits.
For the term OT, see operating thetan.
A thetan exterior is simply a thetan that is partly or wholly out of his body. The only test of whether a person is exterior or not, is whether he experiences that he is not in his body. He finds himself located in one place, while the body is in another. This must never be invalidated, for even though the person may at first only imagine or fantasize that he is outside, this is nonetheless a gradient to attaining the real thing. The term is not much in use in the modern technology, in spite of the fact that exteriorization is done on the upper OT levels.
A theta clear, also a term no longer in common use, is a thetan that is stably exterior. This means that he is not only outside the body at this particular time, but that this is his usual modus operandi. He is usually behind the head and operates the body from that position, but he may prefer some other position. If the body is hurt, he is not automatically pulled back into the body, which a thetan that has just been exteriorized for the first time, probably would. It’s a stable state.
Theta clear: See thetan
Time continuum: A single duration or period of time created by one particular Cycle of Action. It may contain many lesser time continua and itself be part of a bigger time continuum, such as a life time or ”when I went to college”.
Time track: A time continuum, usually of considerable length and often referring to the total existence of a thetan in the physical universe – sometimes called The Time Track – or a ”big cycle” within it.
Tone level: An individual’s position on the Tone Scale.
Tone Scale: Scale of Affinity, loosely referred to as a scale of emotions, although the emotional band is usually considered to be only part of it, namely from – 1.3 (shame) to 8.0 (exhilaration).
The various bands of the Tone Scale can be found on the affinity scale, a.k.a. the Know to Mystery Scale, described in Axiom 25.
TR0-4. TR is short for Training Routine, i.e. a drill for auditors. TRs numbers 0-4 is used, with short lectures, as an introductory course for newcomers to Scientology.
In life, they are an excellent tool for avoiding and ending upsets and futile arguments, and since many Scientologists seem to have forgotten them, I’ll give a brief description of them here.
TR0 teaches the student to be there comfortably while communicating: It has 3 parts.
OT TR0, where the student (trainee) sits with his coach (trainer, usually another student) with closed eyes, saying or doing nothing, until he can be there comfortably.
TR0 with open eyes, saying or doing nothing except being there comfortably.
Bull-baited TR0, where the coach says or does various things to unsettle the student, repeating the same action – pushing the button – until the student is no longer unsettled. The button is then flat and the student can be there comfortably without reacting. Another button is then found and pushed etc.
Although the student says nothing during this drill, he is nevertheless communicating, since duplication – listening and understanding what is said or done by the coach – is also considered to be communication (cf. the comm. formula under Axiom 28). If you don’t listen in a heated argument, you are not communicating, and you won’t know what you are responding to when you ”answer”.
TR1 teaches the student to say a statement with the intention to be duplicated. Eye contact and to some degree loudness play a role. Part of TR1, not stressed in the drill, is to see if the listener is ready to listen
before one speaks. In a real life argument, the other person may be mentally stacking up arguments against something you said earlier, or he may not have finished speaking, and that’s where his attention is.
TR2 Teaches the student to acknowledge that he has heard and understood what the other person said. If the other person has said something but is not sure he has been understood, he’ll say it again – and again and again and again. It’s not always enough to say ”okay” or ”all right”, since such words are often used to make the other person shut up so one can tell him off. One must make it evident that one understands, and in life it can be quite all right to originate a comment, provided it only confirms the fact that one has understood – it must not introduce a protest or a new point in the discussion, that is only allowable after the speaker really feels acknowledged.
TR3 teaches the student to insist on posing the same question until it has been answered (or giving a command until it has been followed, repeat a statement until it has been understood. etc.) In life, one would not necessarily repeat the same question verbatim, but one would stick with the subject matter until the answer to the intended question had been gotten. In an argument, where the other person can have many buttons exposed (i.e. charged areas probably already slightly restimulated), it is particularly important to bring up only one question or statement at a time, otherwise more and more charge will accumulate, since different questions expose different buttons. ”Would you help me clean up before the guests arrive?”, ”You need to change”, ”What are we going to tell them about ...” are three different ”auditing questions”. Don’t give all three of them in one breath, make sure each is understood and properly responded to before stating the next.
TR4 teaches the student to respond only to a bona fide answer to the question or to originations, i.e. statements that are not answers, but relevant or necessary for the question to be answered, They could be clarifications concerning the question, or legitimate objections, difficulties in carrying out a command, facts that have to be taken into account etc. Originations are differentiated from comments, which are not relevant to the question. In life, they are often nonsequitur arguments, e.g. as an attempt to avoid doing something. ”You need to go to the store and buy some milk for the kids”. ”But I worked all day, I’m tired”. If that’s his usual excuse, and if her request is reasonable, it’s a comment. Of course, if he had experienced exceptional hardships at work this very day, it could be a legitimate origination.
It is very common to have great wins on doing a TRs course, and many couples and others decide at one time or another to always keep their TRs in, in their relationship or in life generally. They usually abandon it again for this reason: They feel that they can never be themselves and just relax, or that they always find themselves handling others, and nobody cares about them.
TRs are drills designed for auditors. It’s perfectly safe to forget all about them and be at ease and have a good time with family and friends. But one should notice if another goes below the watershed: As long as the other person is above 2.0 (antagonism), you can assume he is fairly rational and capable of understanding what you are saying. You are peers, and you can relax. But if he descends under the watershed – becomes annoyed, worried, griefy etc. – don’t expect him to hear anything you say. Take on your auditor’s hat (whether you are a trained auditor or not), get your TRs in and listen, acknowledge, and invite him, perhaps, to explain more about particulars relating to his problem. Let him talk freely, but whenever possible, make him tell you the facts (time, place, who etc.) of what he is talking about. Very often it’s a good idea to ask how it began, for that’s when his ARC break occurred, and getting this ARC that existed before the break will often make him key out. When he goes back uptone, you can behave as peers again – and if he knows his TRs, you may want to bring up matters troubling you; but don’t do so before he is above the watershed. What you want to say may be very important, but they are almost never so urgent that they justify ARC breaking him further.
Training = Scientology training as an auditor
Understanding: Is composed of affinity, reality and communication. It refers both to intellectual understanding, e.g. understanding a word or subject, and to sympathetic relationship, as in ”they lived in good understanding with each other”.
It is a gradient scale. When you begin to understand something, you are likely to think about it, form opinions and associate it with other data As understanding increases, mental MEST relating to it decreases, until one understands it fully and hardly ever thinks about it (see Axiom 24). The expert just acts and achieves. He is attentive, but he doesn’t have to think about it or reflect upon it. He has no doubts, vacillations of hesitations.
Universe: A universe can loosely be defined as a whole area with MEST (mental or physical) in it.
It can be a geographical area, such as a planet or solar system, the local campus or the world of marine life; or it can be a more abstract universe, e.g. the universe of a science, football, a sitcom, Scientology etc.
In Scientology, three different basic classes of universes are distinguished: 1) one’s own universe (one’s private mind, inner world), 2) the universe of everybody else and 3) the physical universe. To these, the universe of the body is sometimes added; it is partly physical, partly theta.
Also, one can specifically talk of “mother’s universe”, “uncle George’s universe” etc. In Dianetics (1950), a pc was often found to mistake the universe of a close relative for his own, so he would adopt attitudes and behaviors of his father’s, “being” that person.
Such an unknowingly adopted personality is termed a valence. If a person is in another person’s valence, he is said to be out of valence. It’s an aberration.
Valence: See universe
Watershed: Divide; literally: a stretch of high land dividing the areas drained by different rivers.
In this context, it means the tone level antagonism (2.0), above which a person is mainly set on surviving, and below which he cannot avoid acting to his own detriment, eventually succumbing.
From 2.0 down, the person refuses to go into ARC with much of life so his lack of understanding makes it impossible for him to improve his dynamics overall. He can only go down.
Withhold, withhold phenomena: See overt-motivators, O/Ws
Word clearing: A central part of Scientology study technology. It is often taken to mean getting a word or symbol fully understood, e.g. by looking up its definition and using it in sentences, but it does in fact include the following two principles:
defining all words not fully understood, or misunderstood. The meaning of a word is to be fully understood, which leaves no mental MEST (see understanding, Axiom 24).
getting the mass (object, process etc.) signified by the word, becoming able to find examples of the term or symbol in life or in its specialized area to make sure that one has understood it and feels familiar with it. One should be able to recognize a physical object, fact, circumstance etc. as being an instance of the term. Surprisingly many Scientologists ”know” the Tone Scale and the ARC triangle, yet cannot identify a person’s tone level in life.