************* The following message is relayed to you by trom@lists.newciv.org ************
Dear Aarre
3. Re: Possible error in the original TROM manual (Leo Faulhaber) >> > >> 1. Re: Possible error in the original TROM manual (Aarre Peltomaa) > >> 2. Re: Possible error in the original TROM manual (Leo Faulhaber) > >> > >> > > Dear Aarre > > > > Thanks for your answer. > > > > I'm only on Level 2, but that doesn't hinder me from detecting illogics. > > (totally correct) > > > > I agree: If something should be known then one also wants it to make > known, > > at least to oneself or to a certain degree.(right) > > > > I agree: Either they should all be with 'made', or all be without it. > > > > > > (Hey, live dangerously, why don't you put 'made' on all 4 knowing > > postulates and make it 'symetrical and consistant' in the translation?) > > > Symmetrical is good as long as it is also logical. Actually the symmetry is as follows (in abbreviated form): 1. Make known (SD) and know (PD active voice) or be known (PD passive voice) 2. Make not-known (SD) and not-know (PD active voice) or be not-known (PD passive voice) 3. Know (SD) and make known (PD active voice) or be made known (PD passive voice) 4. Not-know (SD) and make not-known (PD active voice) or be made not-known (PD passive voice) > > I agree: If the word "made" is correct, then it could be just a matter of > > importance. > > > > However I tend to believe that the word "made" is not correct. The > > left part of the statement is the SD postulate and the right part is the > PD > > postulate, which is formulated in passive voice. ( congratulations; you > are > > one of the few people who intimitdates me on grammar. I better study > this, > > and watch my 'p's and 'q's. Whew ! Did I make any mistakes? ) (I'm > going > > to study this above-mentioned point further. I was German in my past > life > > too, and am kind of exacting. ) > No intention here to intimidate you. Alright, let me know your findings. > > > > I agree: One could apply "Evaluation of importances". However importances > > are relative. So for most of the readers of TROM it probably has only > very > > little importance. For me, as I'm working on a translation, it has quite > > some importance. And the illogic also worked somehow like a misunderstood > > for me. > > > > > > ( how important is it that the translation be perfect the first time out > > ? One idea that I had is that you just translate the thing as verbatum > as > > you can the first time, and then, when you get up the levels more highly > > yourself, then re-evalutate the data for an edited 2nd edition with > slight > > corrections; my gut feeling is that just getting the data to our German > > speaking friends as soon as possible is more important than perfection. > I > > think the least perfect thing is to not get the data to them as soon as > > possbile. Perhaps in the editorial notes, you can apologize in advance, > and > > recognize the outpoints; They will forgive you any transgressions. I'm > > 99.999999% sure of that. If I'm wrong, come and kick my butt personally; > I > > invite you. I understand that Scientology is having some problems with > the > > German government, so the public may be ready for an alternative that > > doesn't have the 'bad name' of Scientology. Maybe they are really ready? > ) > It has quite some importance. There are a couple of existing German translations. Some are quite good, others are quite faulty. Yes, maybe I'll change some of my viewpoints later on. I'm really glad that you think that people will forgive me for any transgressions. Most of the German speaking people are German but there are also Swiss and Austrian people. > > > > > It does have no influence on the processes/exercises, as the chart uses a > > slightly different wording and lists only the SD postulates. > > > > Best wishes > > > > Leo Faulhaber > Best wishes Leo Faulhaber > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > >> Message: 1 > >> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 12:48:45 -0400 > >> From: Aarre Peltomaa <peltomaa.aa...@gmail.com> > >> Subject: Re: [TROM1] Possible error in the original TROM manual > >> To: The Resolution of Mind list <trom@lists.newciv.org> > >> Message-ID: > >> <aanlktins-ckv_hxwxsstumdgthj7chsb7lrk6r2iu...@mail.gmail.com> > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > >> > >> Hi Leo, Mar. 30/'11 > >> > >> Thanks so much for your email. I'm only on level 3, so take that into > >> your > >> eval of my email. I looked at this point in my mind, and what popped up > >> was.. > >> If a thetan postulates 'that it should be known', doesn't that by > default > >> also encompass 'that it should be made known' automatically? Remember, > >> the > >> thetan wants something, and then he makes the postulate for that to > >> happen. > >> He's already decided that it should be known, so doesn't it > automatically > >> by default become 'made' by the simple fact of his postulating the > effect > >> into existance? I could be wrong on this, but it 'feels' like the only > >> thing the word 'made' would do is imply more import on the intention, > more > >> 'must have' on doing it? I agree that consistency gives me a more > >> confident > >> feeling; either they should all be with 'made', or all be without it. > We > >> could apply the 'Student Hat' tape of L. Ron Hubbard of 'Evaluation of > >> Importances' to this? > >> Dennis said that all of Scientology with the exception of half of one > >> axiom, > >> fits into TROM, so we may use that tech also. > >> Does the process run just as well either way to you? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Aarre Peltomaa > >> peltomaa.aa...@gmail.com > >> (647) 202-7267 > >> > >> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 11:04 AM, Pete McLaughlin < > >> pete_mclaughlin_93...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> > >> > ************* > >> > The following message is relayed to you by trom@lists.newciv.org > >> > ************ > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > --- On *Wed, 3/30/11, Leo Faulhaber <leo.faulha...@gmail.com>* wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> > From: Leo Faulhaber <leo.faulha...@gmail.com> > >> > Subject: Re: Possible error in the original TROM manual > >> > To: "Pete McLaughlin" <pete_mclaughlin_93...@yahoo.com> > >> > Date: Wednesday, March 30, 2011, 12:08 AM > >> > > >> > Hi Pete > >> > > >> > I haven't got an answer from you so far. Did I say anything in my mail > >> that > >> > annoyed you? > >> > > >> > Best wishes > >> > > >> > Leo Faulhaber > >> > > >> > 2011/3/22 Leo Faulhaber <leo.faulha...@gmail.com< > >> http://mc/compose?to=leo.faulha...@gmail.com> > >> > > > >> > > >> > Hi Pete > >> > > >> > Thanks for your answer! > >> > > >> > 2011/3/21 Pete McLaughlin <pete_mclaughlin_93...@yahoo.com< > >> http://mc/compose?to=pete_mclaughlin_93...@yahoo.com> > >> > > > >> > > >> > hi Leo > >> > > >> > The original notes of Dennis were typed up by Greg Pickering. The > text > >> > found on the Freezone website is that original material. Judith > >> Anderson > >> > complained to Dennis that there were a number of grammar errors in the > >> text > >> > and corrected these before she started selling her version of TROM. > >> > > >> > > >> > Thanks for letting me know. I read that about Greg in your > >> introduction. > >> > > >> > > >> > i also found many grammar errors and other inconsistencies in the Greg > >> > Pickering text so corrected these and added some footnotes and > >> definitions > >> > etc. to produce the TROM text you can download at tromhelp.com. > >> > > >> > I do habe your "version" of TROM. > >> > > >> > > >> > Dennis found he had made an error in wording on the level 5 chart > >> which > >> > he mentions in one of the tapes. i corrected the copy of TROM that i > >> > publish on tromhelp.com to include this correction. > >> > > >> > > >> > Well done. I listened to that tape too and it's "correctly corected" > >> now. I > >> > mean, it makes sense now and that's what it should do. > >> > > >> > > >> > I see the point of logic you are making but it does not rise to the > >> level > >> > of being an error that will stop progress in resolving the mind. > >> > > >> > > >> > Great that you can see it. For most of the people it won't be problem. > >> For > >> > me it is (was) one. I got somehow stuck there. It worked like a > >> > misunderstood if you know what I mean. > >> > > >> > > >> > I hesitate to make changes in the text i post on the website beyond > >> what > >> > i have done so far. i could already be accused of altering the > original > >> text > >> > with what i have done. > >> > > >> > > >> > You don't need to make this change. But I would be happy if you could > >> > publish my post on the mailing list so we can have a duscussionon it. > If > >> we > >> > then see 90% agreing with my point of view, you can have another look > at > >> it. > >> > (Or if we have only 10% agreeing with me, I can have another look at > >> it.) > >> > > >> > > >> > You of course should make any changes you want in your copy so as to > >> make > >> > TROM work better for you. > >> > > >> > > >> > I will mention it in my translation. Just a note in parentheses. > >> > > >> > > >> > i keep my active copy of TROM on my laptop computer and make changes > >> and > >> > add notes when ever i feel the need. the addition or removal of even > a > >> > comma can greatly alter the meaning of the written document. as my > >> > understanding of TROM increases i find that my earlier interpretation > >> was > >> > incorrect and make changes. > >> > > >> > > >> > I agree it's a heavy one to duplicate and duplication can change as > one > >> > progresses. > >> > > >> > > >> > i expect this process to continue so i do not have a PERFECT text > for > >> > TROM. i feel it is best to leave it as close as possible to what > Dennis > >> > approved at present. > >> > do bring up these observations as you find them and i hope others on > the > >> > site will benefit from relooking at the text to question if they > >> understood > >> > it right. > >> > > >> > > >> > I appreciate that you maintain the site with the written and tape > >> > materials. On the other hand I do have a slight disagreement with > adding > >> LRH > >> > definitions for certains words or concepts out of the Tech Dictionary. > >> For > >> > example that one for "games condition". No need to define it per > >> > Scientology. Dennis does define it much better in the text. Or that > one > >> for > >> > "communication". Dennis gives a much better definition (in my > opinion). > >> It > >> > also might put TROM into danger because of copyright infringements. > It's > >> > already quite risky on the part of Dennis to use the words "overt" and > >> > "motivator". > >> > > >> > By the way: My translation is now being checked by Happyharry. > >> > > >> > All the best > >> > > >> > Leo > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > Keep on TROMing > >> > > >> > Pete > >> > > >> > --- On *Sun, 3/20/11, Leo Faulhaber <leo.faulha...@gmail.com< > >> http://mc/compose?to=leo.faulha...@gmail.com> > >> > >* wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> > From: Leo Faulhaber <leo.faulha...@gmail.com< > >> http://mc/compose?to=leo.faulha...@gmail.com> > >> > > > >> > Subject: Possible error in the original TROM manual > >> > To: trom-ow...@lists.newciv.org< > >> http://mc/compose?to=trom-ow...@lists.newciv.org> > >> > Date: Sunday, March 20, 2011, 9:01 AM > >> > > >> > > >> > Hello > >> > > >> > I think there is an error in the original TROM manual. There is an > >> > additional word in the following point 2). It says: > >> > > >> > The four basic actions of life each have a twin postulate structure: > >> > > >> > 1. The postulate bringing the effect into existence, and the postulate > >> that > >> > it shall be known. > >> > 2. The postulate taking the effect out of existence, and the > postulate > >> > that it shall be made (this is the word in question) not-known. > >> > 3. The postulate to know the effect and the postulate that it shall be > >> > made known. > >> > 4. The postulate to not-know the effect and the postulate that it > shall > >> be > >> > made not-known. > >> > > >> > My reasoning goes as follows: > >> > > >> > If the word "made" is correct in point 2) then it should also be > present > >> in > >> > point 1) which should then read: ... that it shall be made known. > >> > > >> > But "to make known" or "to make not-known" are postulates on the > >> self-side > >> > (bringing something into existence). But here we have it to do with a > >> twin > >> > postulate structure. First part of the sentence is the > "self-determined" > >> > postulate and the second part of the sentence is the "pan-determined" > >> > postulate. And the purpose for the "other side" (not self) is that it > >> should > >> > be known or not-known. So the word "made" is an additive and should be > >> > deleted. > >> > > >> > Please let me know your ideas about this. > >> > > >> > Leo Faulhaber > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > Trom mailing list > >> > Trom@lists.newciv.org > >> > http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom > >> > > >> > > >> -------------- next part -------------- > >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > >> URL: > >> > http://lists.newciv.org/pipermail/trom/attachments/20110330/6c79b4a2/attachment-0001.html > >> > >> ------------------------------ > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Trom mailing list > >> Trom@lists.newciv.org > >> http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom > >> > >> > >> End of Trom Digest, Vol 80, Issue 12 > >> ************************************ > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Trom mailing list > > Trom@lists.newciv.org > > http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://lists.newciv.org/pipermail/trom/attachments/20110403/0db0b457/attachment.html > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Trom mailing list > Trom@lists.newciv.org > http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom > > > End of Trom Digest, Vol 81, Issue 8 > *********************************** >
_______________________________________________ Trom mailing list Trom@lists.newciv.org http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
