Criticism of As-isness

Discussion in 'Scientology Technology' started by mearvk, Mar 23, 2014.

View Users: View Users
  1. mearvk

    mearvk Banned

    Now let's look quickly at as-isness. You take a problem you'd like to have cease existing and you say per Scientology technology that you'd like to "as-is" the problem. Now it never does apparently occur to Scientologists that a person and/or group can create "just because they have decided to". The technology of as-isness appears to based then on the premise that all problems are derived from misunderstandings and/or hidden causes - and that uncovering the hidden misunderstanding and/or hidden cause will resolve the problem. John "as-ised" the incident in his reactive mind would be comparable to saying John uncovered the hidden cause of some of part of his behavioral pattern.

    Now taking up where this logic apparently fails, imagine you encounter a disgruntled individual who is acting rudely, provocatively, to you without real justification and you say to yourself, "I'm a Scientologist, I don't want this problem, so let me just as-is the problem". You may be able to see that you are being treated in a way calculated to make you angry and so a proper handling would be to see it just that way and communicate that you do understand the as-isness. That would be seemingly the correct handling. However even after you say "Listen, I understand you've maybe had a bad day so let me buy you a beer" the attitude doesn't necessarily change. And you may see that this kind of thing is surprisingly common. The angry individual is sort of complaining that he has no choice in the matter and therefore will persist in his right to have that choice by remaining angry.

    So what I am saying is that you can understand a thing's "as-isness" and it not unmock. Then it would follow that understanding a something's "as-isness" wouldn't actually imply that one could uncreate it. In other words even at the level of basic axioms Scientology is not properly defined in terms of scope or application. So understand that asking "does it work?" comes rightly before asking "how does it work?" That should be fairly obvious.

    So before you jump off the reality wagon and start asking yourself curious questions like "Am I mocking this guy up mocking up confrontation and how can I be more responsible for it so I can as-is it?", please do stop and recognize even some of the fundamental technology is probably incompletely researched.

    Now you can say as-isness sort of serves as a litmus test, delineating which individuals play more fairly than others but this would be penny wise pound foolish since we are given to believe that as-isness is part of the Scientology technology bedrock called the axioms. It's not even clear, more to toward the purpose of a strong criticism, that as-isness works as described in the mental realm either.

    In summary as-isness sits below choice and below fundamental, inalienable rights. Your right to understand and resolve a problem doesn't always, rightly or wrongly, sit above another individual's right to be part of one. The emphasis should be on understanding but not at the expense of proper handling. Thanks for reading.
     
    Last edited: Mar 23, 2014
  2. Leon-2

    Leon-2 Patron Meritorious

    What a load of garbage twaddle.
     
  3. Book'em Danno

    Book'em Danno New Member

    As-isness occurs to me to me as a beautiful thing, an ideal condition of existence. If one has truly decided to have a problem then that is the as-isness. Your problem is therefore not alter-ised or not-ised. It will “persist” as long and you keep creating the problem. The beauty of this kind of problem is that it is destroyed the instant you stop creating it. Continuous As-isness stems from a very high state of being.

    From Scientology Axiom 11 we go to the first mention of a problem in Axiom 39 and we get the meat of a problem in Axiom 40, any problem to be a problem must contain a lie. The problem you continuously create in an as-isness is not the kind of problem of Axiom 40 because the as-isness does not contain any lies. The kind of problem which Axiom 40 refers to is probably the common usage of the term. This kind of problem persists and may be unwanted.

    Without working to hard at it I can think of a lot of lies besides misunderstandings and/or hidden causes. My personal favorites for lies is time and misownership.

    If a disgruntled individual is trying to create a problem with you, don’t play, walk away. That is one as-isness to the situation.

    If you want to fix the disgruntled individual and he is truly creating, as-ising it, you won’t be able to stop him by buying him a beer. You might be able to stop him by overwhelming him, like breaking a bear over his head. This would clearly be an example of suppressive auditing.

    If this disgruntled individual has pushed your buttons and you want to have a problem with them we have now dropped to a very human condition which is complex, full of altered facts, and a long way from simple as-isness. It will therefore be complex to solve.

    My favorite demo for as-isness is fixing a car that doesn’t start. The motor will not turn-over so it cannot start. Thinking my wife drove it last as the cause is a very long way from as-is ness. The next thing to do is replace battery. Yes the starter wasn’t getting any juice. The new battery will now provide the juice to turn over the engine and allow it to start and then run. Because the problem was temporarily resolved the solution contained some as-is ness. But in a couple days the motor doesn’t start again. The basic truth which had to be uncovered was the alternator was broke and won’t charge the battery, so it ran down. The true as-isness is to replace the alternator so that the new one can keep the battery charged-up so that it remains capable of turning over the motor allowing it to start. When you finally uncovered the actual truth you as-ised the problem.
    This is a MESTy problem so as-ising requires MEST to solve.

    The car won’t start by magic, you have to physically get a new alternator and install it. Your charge may blow when you grasp the true solution. But the problem of the car not turning over requires a MEST solution, only then does the MEST problem as-is.
     
  4. strativarius

    strativarius Inveterate gnashnab & snoutband

    Newbie or not, any poster claiming that Hubbard's as-isness, alter-isness and not-isness actually exist is talking complete bollocks. Sorry! And a newbie coming here to lecture me on the subject...? Give me a break!
     
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2015
  5. I told you I was trouble

    I told you I was trouble Suspended animation



    He's baaaaack (hello again Mearvk).


    :biggrin:
     
  6. strativarius

    strativarius Inveterate gnashnab & snoutband

    Just what I was thinking trubs. I thought I was responding to an OP above but then saw that the actual OP was mearvk who is banned and the penny dropped. You just can't keep a good troll down eh?
     
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2015
  7. Lone Star

    Lone Star Crusader

    I got something MEST you can grasp right here beyatch!! It'll blow a charge too!

    It'll be some real Havingness as well. :yes:
     
  8. oneonewasaracecar

    oneonewasaracecar Gold Meritorious Patron

    Actually, no.

    There are many problems that are not caused by people's creative act.

    We don't control the weather. Problems exist. They happen independently of our actions.
    If my toilet doesn't flush, what is the lie?
    It doesn't remove the problem.

    If that person is an asshole, walking away from them will not solve that.

    If that person is trying to force you to understand that Scientology doesn't work, using Scientology to justify walking away does not solve the problems inherent in the Scientology 'tech.'
    Smashing someone over the head creates additional problems while leaving the original problems intact.
    If you remove the nonsense from this, like the use of the word MEST and as-is, you are left with nothing more profound than "if you car has an electrical fault, you troubleshoot it and fix it."

    Here's a clue: you can spend a lot less than $500,000 to learn how to solve problems like a busted transmission.

    The bonus is you'll be able to speak English at the end of it.
     
  9. oneonewasaracecar

    oneonewasaracecar Gold Meritorious Patron

    If they use their hands, you really shouldn't call it havingness.

    Did you learn nothing from the Clinton deposition about Monica Lewinsky?

    Shame on you.
     
  10. Lone Star

    Lone Star Crusader

    Depends on what your meaning of the word "it" is.
     
  11. oneonewasaracecar

    oneonewasaracecar Gold Meritorious Patron

    :omg:
     
  12. F.Bullbait

    F.Bullbait Oh, a wise guy,eh?

    I just as-ised this! Now, on to my next creation...



    [​IMG]



    :p
     
  13. Book'em Danno

    Book'em Danno New Member

    My second most effective auditor John Gilesbie (RIP) had trouble with As-isness. Simply, he would say, “If I admire my girlfriend she’ll be gone.” So I thought I would post a concept which I’m fond of, and may not be widely understood. My post was about continuous creation, it began with problems one knowingly creates, and has fun with, not other kinds of problems.

    In a physics class my professor spoke about Newtons “laws” (which revolutionized an industrializing world). He said they were just models/constructs. They work very well and we still use them today. But Newton didn’t say what gravitation was, his law only said what it did. He was close enough to the truth of gravitation to revolutionize the world. Physicists today are trying the validate the what of gravity; gravity waves and the like. I’m related this lesson I learned to the board because the phenomena of Hubbardian “as-isness” can be thought with other models/constructs. But I charge not only is the phenomena undeniable it is one of the modes of operation of this board.

    Some of us have studied the construct of Hubbardian "as-isness "and claim it to be complete nonsense. Yet the very action of many posts to this board is an attempt to isolate and expose lies. In doing so what is intended? I believe this effort to expose lies and to that degree open the door for truth, is an attempt to give people relief, and improve the human condition. In my world these actions are in fact doing the how and the why of "as-ising."

    This board is dealing with lightning in a bottle, we are sharing here the darkest reaches of the human condition (unconsciousness, self-deception, deceit, treachery, slavery, suppression, even murder) and at the other end embracing the possibility that human potential is beyond measure. It’s a struggle to expose lies, find the truth, and have some fun doing it. I think it is truly extra-ordinary.
     
  14. Jump

    Jump Operating teatime


    I think Hubbard controlled people with lies. In fact, he said this was the only way to control people.

    So to Hubbard, the control was the acceptable truth he wanted to maintain. However as soon as anybody tried expose the real truth - by joking or asking awkward questions they were somehow re-educated, silenced or expelled.

    Yes, the truth exposes the lie and makes its control just disappear.
     
  15. phenomanon

    phenomanon Canyon

    I notice that the Newbie does not include "is-ness" in his reply. Did BeD gorget that "is-ness" is an important component of the "conditions", or does BeD not-is is-ness?

    About those Axioms: I don't know how many times that I have had to memorize those. On 4 or 5 different courses. One that I thought of when I read this thread was the time on some Course, maybe OEC, maybe FEBC, whatever. We did Chinese School for an hour each day on the Axioms, 1 thru 10. Then we would get a Sup check out. The Sup would call out the number of the Axiom, and the student had to answer up with the proper Axiom, without a comm lag.
    I always passed the check outs, but when I read this thread and started thinking about Axioms, I couldn't remember a single one of them.
    I guess scn only "works" when you are IN scn. :duh:
     
  16. Cat Daddy

    Cat Daddy Silver Meritorious Patron

    reality ?
     
  17. Ogsonofgroo

    Ogsonofgroo Crusader

    So, like, as-wasness (circa late 20th century)...

    Hubbard and his madness for creating bullshit words to explain stuff that there are already words for... 'As-is-ness', holy crap, did he mean 'being', maybe 'existing'? What a poop-twaddler he was imho...

    :confused2:

    Good lordy-alrighty-beam-me-up-Scotty!

    :eyeroll:
     
  18. Cat Daddy

    Cat Daddy Silver Meritorious Patron

    I have like-ness for you

     
  19. lotus

    lotus autonomous rebellous

    I guess the same too :confused2:
    At least that was the case for me and all my frieds that went to travel other places...:confused2:

    Let's look at those pseudo metaphysic asssertions of pseudo Dr Hubbard the pseudo nuclear physicist who failed miserabily his high school and science classes

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    That must be an indicator he didn't get science better than I did! So I must have rely on my own in regard to science instead of buying his pseudo-meta-physics BS! But..but but...that was when I was searching for a pseudo spiritual guru who know universe secrets , instead of knowing life intelligence had given us everything we need in the many intelligence we are blessed with, including intuition. :unsure:



    Axiom 1 Life is basically a static.

    DEFINITION: A life static has no mass, no motion, no wavelength, no location in space or in time. It has the ability to postulate and to perceive.

    Axiom 2 The static is capable of considerations, postulates and opinions.

    Axiom 3 Space, energy, objects, form and time are the result of considerations made and/or agreed upon by the static and are perceived solely because the static considers that it can perceive them.

    Axiom 4 Space is a viewpoint of dimension.

    Axiom 5 Energy consists of postulated particles in space.

    Axiom 6 Objects consist of grouped particles.

    Axiom 7 Time is basically a postulate that space and particles will persist.

    Axiom 8 The apparency of time is the change of position of particles in space.

    Axiom 9 Change is the primary manifestation of time.

    Axiom 10 The highest purpose in the universe is the creation of an effect.

    Axiom 1 and 2 doesn't make any sens.

    So, alife static has no mass, no motion, no wavelength, no location in space or in time
    BUT It has the ability to postulate and to perceive and is capable of considerations, postulates and opinions. :whistling:

    He describes here the mental and calls it a static!

    Dr Hubtard never ever knew what spirituality was...he confused it with mental and egoness.

    It would be interesting to ask an astro-physicist what he\she thinks about it...for example does universe has a purpose to create an effect....does life has opinions ??? :whistling:

    My opinion is that Ron Hubbard didn't have a clue what life is about and what a spiritual being is, because he never truly observed it, he was only interested in being considered as a fake guru and be admired as a humanitarian. Otherwise, the fake humanitarian wouldn't be violent , ressentful and hatred toward his wives and kids as he was with hundreds of other people who have served him like slave. When you know what like is about you take it for precious - especially the one you are supposed to care for.

    If he would have get an ounce of the life basics..and spirituality, he would have behave decently and grow some love and compassion.
     
    Last edited: Oct 16, 2015
  20. phenomanon

    phenomanon Canyon


    :goodposting: I remember that Axiom10 well.
    At the time I thought 'o well, if the highest purpose is the creation of an effect, why not just blow this fooking place up?! That'll create an effect!'

    Maybe that's what Mankind is doing...creating an effect by destroying the fooking planet?