.ll 72
.fo off
.co on
.ce ((Editor's comments in double parenthesis - Homer))

.ce PERSONALITY TYPES

.ce FAF - 10
.ce 22 April 1990

.ce Copyright (C) Flemming A. Funch
.ce Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes


     It is very interesting that despite the workability of the tech it
is still possible to divide people into types of personality.  That is,
various psychological groupings, astrology, graphology, numerology and
so forth can still work quite precisely even after a person has had
considerable amounts of clearing.

     Some people might try to refuse that saying that a Clear wouldn't
be the effect of those things.  Others might take that to mean that
those are universal laws that will always apply.  The fact of the matter
is that the categorizations are demonstrable.

     How come that even when a person has done OL16 you can still
categorize him or her quite fittingly as visual, auditory, or
kinesthetically oriented, or as a Virgo, Pisces or whatever?

     Well, these things are Beingnesses.  Any beingness is in the final
evaluation assumed, and not the person himself.  They can be considered
as aberrations if the person is not cause over them.

     Demonstrably the levels up through OL16 do little to change the
person's identity (beingness) or personality type (group of beingness).
They do a lot of other things in terms of freeing the person and making
him more able and aware.  But the beingness categories will resist
change through most of this, the person's beingness will change very
little.  However, eventually that will have to be cleared too.

     As long as the being is stuck in a certain beingness, a certain
category of behavior, a certain pattern of behavior - he hasn't gone all
the way through.  He might feel wonderful and be very successful in the
identity he is in.  But if that identity is mostly unchanged since
before he started Clearing chances are it is stuck.

     Now, an assessment of the person's category of beingness might
provide valuable information for programming of the case.  That resource
is currently utilized in a very limited fashion; it might be a subject
for further research.

     Most practitioners find that certain types of people are more or
less easy to clear.  Except for when resistive case points are involved
that is mostly ignored.  Every kind of beingness has to be handled
sooner or later; maybe more attention should be given to it sooner.

     One could imagine that an assessment of whether a person is
visually, auditorily, or kinesthetically oriented would give a hint as
to which kind of program would be most effective on the person.  Maybe
creative processing works very well on one type but not for another.
Maybe that could provide part of the explanation why certain processes
were earlier given up because they didn't work equally well on
enerybody.  Maybe we could use a wider range of effective processes - if
a more thorough assessment is done of what the person needs and responds
to.

     Being resigned to the fact that a certain pc is hard to work with,
doesn't
run well, doesn't get much TA, etc is never the solution.  A lot can be
taken care of by skilful handling of resistive points.  But probably
more by attention to stuck beingnesses:  either clearing them, or
tailoring the program to them.

     If a pc is in a certain beingness or personality type that works
against clearing, we can do one of two things:

     1. Get rid of the stuck beingness.  That is the preferable
solution.  Service Facs, LX lists, XDN, Ls, GPMs, or any other identity
type of processing can be used for this.

     2. If we can't get rid of the beingness we might accommodate it to
a certain extent.  We might make up the program according to our
evaluation of the beingness category of the pc.

     So, one has to realize both of these sides of the issue:

     - Beingnesses and types of personality exist and might be very
stuck.

     - They don't have to exist.  If they are stuck they should and
could be cleared.

     Flemming