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.