PM on another forum:
Quotejust signed up and was trawling a few posts, noticed that you are listed as a Discordian and seem to poo-poo the law of attraction. I'm not being judgemental at all I just wondered if you had a specific avenue of thought which lead you to state this as the way I understand it RAW wasn't against the ideas of the law of attraction, being as he was a dedicated Crowley student.
I know what I think ie that the Law of Attraction is New Age mumbo jumbo which, when reversed, has creepy implications. While I don't deny mood and emotion can have an effect on how you act, and so how people act to you, this is an interpersonal domain and little more. And even then, you're into a notoriously subjective area, where lots of other factors are at play.
But I'm willing to hear other potential explanations and arguments.
Isn't this just The Secret again?
As far as I'm concerned, the Law of Affirmation (LoA) is shorthand for a specific manipulation of the Law of Fives (Lo5).
Positive affirmations can help the brain find patterns that help achieve reasonable goals, and can often trigger the placebo effect.
Where it all seems to go wrong is when people start thinking that the Universe is bending to their Will, or that this is a Real Law.
Just to underscore: QUANTUM PHYSICS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS. Other than, you know, describing the fundamental building blocks of the universe.
Essentially, yes, its The Secret. Lo5 is probably a good angle to take.
I'd suggest offering up the Quarter Trick from Prometheus Rising for inspection.
ACTION:You convince yourself that there are quarters laying about on the street, and then you find them.
LoA says that's because the Universe created them out of Quantum because you wished for it.
Lo5 says you notice them because now you've put it in your filter to look for them.
The reality you experience is the reality you effect... but not the Reality that IS. LMNO is riding the correct motorcycle here.
In defense though, as Bob and Crowley and many other crazy ass motherfuckers have pointed out. LOL of 5's, LOL of Attraction or LOL of ROFL are all Real in some sense, Not Real in some sense and Immaterial in some sense. When I first began the quarter experiment, I hadn't grokked the whole patterns thing yet. QP was the first RAW book I read and other than Crowley (which I'd confused his map for the territory) I hadn't really gotten into this sort of stuff. The Quarter Experiment was the cobblestone path that ended with me stuck in Chapel Perilous ;-)
At any rate, I did the whole experiment; first month I just looked for Quarters, second month I convinced myself that I was causing them, the third month I convinced myself I was simply finding a pattern. Each month I kept a record of Quarters found. Grand Total was over 400 quarters. The difference between the second month (law of attraction) and third month (Law of 45's) was negligible. The Law of Attraction, then is true in some sense, though it may not be the best map of the territory. However, for some applications (particularly personal/psychological/self-therapy sorta stuff) the Law of Attraction provides some 'handles' (self-confidence, control etc) that the Law of Fives does not (hey I found a pattern that I was looking for).
... in some sense ;-)
(http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0002I84N0.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg)???
Rat, you're saying LoA is true "in some sense" because it produces a predicted result.
But you're leaving out that it is bullshit "in a whole lot of sense" because the reasoning behind it is completely flawed.
Your thinking implies that if I said that "if I let go of a pencil, it drops because a tiny demon grabs it and carries it to the floor," you would call that sentence true "in some sense", because the pencil really does fall when I let go.
And if that's where you want to go with Sri's mantra, then you've pretty much made every statement meaningless.
In some sense.
Quote from: LMNO redux on March 05, 2009, 04:22:02 PM
Rat, you're saying LoA is true "in some sense" because it produces a predicted result.
But you're leaving out that it is bullshit "in a whole lot of sense" because the reasoning behind it is completely flawed.
Your thinking implies that if I said that "if I let go of a pencil, it drops because a tiny demon grabs it and carries it to the floor," you would call that sentence true "in some sense", because the pencil really does fall when I let go.
And if that's where you want to go with Sri's mantra, then you've pretty much made every statement meaningless.
In some sense.
No, I'm saying that the Law of Attraction is 'true in some sense', because it can provide someone with the necessary psychological handles to successfully implement the Law of Fives. If you tell someone "you can change your perception and it will help you slightly sometimes by showing you something that might be useful", then many people would say "But, that's not real, it won't help. STFU". If however, you tell those same spags that Quantum Physics and Multiverse theory clearly support the idea that there are infinite parallel universes which, with the right mindset, will attract the universe that most closely aligns with your desires... then they will apply it, act on it and have success... by finding 5's and 23's and Quarters and thinking that they are in control of their life.
Sometimes a model isn't about what is TRUE, but about what is USEFUL.
In my opinion, Sri's mantra, RAW's Maybe Logic and Model Agnosticism all focus far more on the usefulness of a given idea/model/concept rather than its objective relationship to material Reality.
Does that mean we should behave like Ramtha's people? I don't think so.
so the LoA is basically this?
http://www.hulu.com/watch/45672/its-always-sunny-in-philadelphia-vision-board
I tried to attract a wife
but now she beats me
am I doing it wrong?
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on March 05, 2009, 05:07:28 PM
I tried to attract a wife
but now she beats me
am I doing it wrong?
No. It's apparent that 2/3 of you deserve it.
the thing is the Law of Attraction (no matter how you wanna lay it out) it presents itself as religion science
and because it presents itself as science it can be studied
and there has been studies in science journals (all of which confirm that "the Secret" is basically crap)
but I lost the links and my googling powers is broke
but I know someone who would have thes link so Ill email him today... it might be a while till he gets back though
You know, I was gonna argue it out with Rat, and then I realized he's going hardcore with the Sacred Bull parable.
So, what we agree on:
The techniques of LoA seem to be effective.
The reasoning behind LoA seem to be utter bullshit.
Quote from: LMNO redux on March 05, 2009, 05:29:18 PM
You know, I was gonna argue it out with Rat, and then I realized he's going hardcore with the Sacred Bull parable.
So, what we agree on:
The techniques of LoA seem to be effective.
The reasoning behind LoA seem to be utter bullshit.
YES!
Let me put it this way:
Pagan FruFru Head "Oh, hey, I am gonna order a Big Mac off the Menu!" = "I Can Haz LoA!"
Discordian: "That is just a HAMBURGER, it is not a FUCKING Overweight Scotsman!!" = LoA is Lo5! It is NOT Quantum Physics!
Pagan: "Well, the guy behind the counter just took my order and my debit card" = Guru says LoA and it's gonna cost me!
Discordian: "You Stupid Spag! They aren't gonna give you a overweight Scotsman, they're gonna give you a f'ing hamburger." = LoA is Lo5 and you shouldn't be paying 5 bucks for it, you can make it at home for $2.
Pagan: "But, I am eating it right now. In fact it is so yummy, I'm taking the place mat home and eating the picture of the Big Mac for dinner!" = LoA is not only useful model... IT IS SCIENCEY TROOF!
Discordian "Of fuck off" = "Oh fuck off"
:lulz:
LoA is just a signifier. It's unfortunate that so many people confuse the signifier with reality. However, even some spagged up Discordians confuse the Lo5's with Reality... I think that has more to do with the way their brain works, than the model they happen to be looking at.
You know? I suppose it bothers me that people are going around with false information.
Because it's not an act of faith. It's not believing what can't be proven. It's willful ignorance.
Because people who think misinformation is True will act on the basis of that misinformation. Which leads them, for example, to the point where if something bad happens to a person, then according to LoA, it's that person's fault; whereas with Lo5, this conclusion isn't reached.
It's the motherfucking barstool all over again.
:barstool:
The conclusion is what really bothers me about the whole Law of Attraction. Its basically an excuse to sneer at people suffering through no fault of their own, and plays directly into Horatio Alger-esque bullshit fantasies.
Quote from: LMNO redux on March 05, 2009, 06:03:03 PM
You know? I suppose it bothers me that people are going around with false information.
Because it's not an act of faith. It's not believing what can't be proven. It's willful ignorance.
I disagree... I think its faith/belief. Saying that Wiccans came from the ANCIENT traditions and that the Christians stole the Bread/Wine from the ancient Wiccans... that is Willful Ignorance. To say that 1,000,000,000,000,000 witches were killed in TEH BURNIN TIMEZ! That is willful ignorance.
To believe in the Law of Attraction, is a belief no more or less stupid than believing or not believing in Free Will. Granted, I would prefer that people THINK about THINKING and come to the realization that LoA is Lo5's as seen through the glass darkly. However, for some people the dark glasses are an SEP field that gets them through the day.
Quote
Because people who think misinformation is True will act on the basis of that misinformation. Which leads them, for example, to the point where if something bad happens to a person, then according to LoA, it's that person's fault; whereas with Lo5, this conclusion isn't reached.
That is a Big Truth and the opposite of it is also a Big Truth:
Quote
People who think LoA is True will act on the basis of that misinformation. Which leads them, for example, to successfully seize the moment and succeed in their goals. LoA says that this is their fault... AND IT IS RIGHT.
The more I reflect on my opinions about Discordianism, the more I think it has been influenced by my time as a JW.
When I was one of Jehovah's Witnesses, I was taught many TRUE things about the Bible. For example, the concept of the Trinity is not supported by the Bible and, in fact, came from non christian belief systems. Hell, is neither in the Bible, in BC Judaism OR in early Christian beliefs, it too came from other sources. I hated to see people consumed by believing misinformation. I would spend 70 Hours a month trying to help people see that they believed lies. Then, I came to the realization that much of the TRUTH I knew, was also misinformation and lies. I had spent 23 years of my life trying to HELP other people with their misinformation, all the while consuming lies with ketchup and salt. I remember one day, as I was studying the bible and the scripture where Jesus says "First remove the rafter from your own eye, before you remove the straw from your brothers eye".
I do not yet think I KNOW the Truth... so why the fuck should I go tell someone else that their truth is false?
One time, in the ministry, I was speaking on the non-existence of Hell. How the concept came into Christian beliefs well after the first century, how the "supportive" scriptures are full of metaphor, indicating that the 'hell' is a metaphor as well... the person at the door listened and then said "My Father beat my mother, beat all of us kids and left us when we were just children. I was 13 and had to quit school and get a job. If I could not believe that he is burning in Hell, I would have no desire to believe in God, heaven or anything else."
I think a lot of people might be like that person... they believe whatever helps them sleep at night. Who am I, with my silly Chaos Goddess and crazy Law of Fives to hit them with a barstool?
I mean, if they started it and were being assholes, I'd hit them... but if they're just getting by, let them drink themselves into a stupor so they can, at least, get some rest.
At least, that's what I think this minute....
Quote from: Cain on March 05, 2009, 06:30:39 PM
The conclusion is what really bothers me about the whole Law of Attraction. Its basically an excuse to sneer at people suffering through no fault of their own, and plays directly into Horatio Alger-esque bullshit fantasies.
People will always find an excuse to sneer at people who suffer. It existed far before the Law of Attraction and will exist far after the last Neo-Quantum-Pagan has died.
As for the Law of Attraction, I currently subscribe to the Dr. Steel model:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ConLzMk-jg
All you think you are,
Everything you want to be
Is only happening in your reality
We Decide It
I find it really selfish... even if you take out the whole people bitching for more money and/or mates (which describes the law of attraction forums)... even if you take out the whole interpreting quantum physics to suit your own believes... even if you take out the whole blaming the victim... the whole thing seems like an excuse to reestablish yourself as the center of the universe... a sort of reverting back to childhood
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on March 05, 2009, 06:41:51 PM
I find it really selfish... even if you take out the whole people bitching for more money and/or mates (which describes the law of attraction forums)... even if you take out the whole interpreting quantum physics to suit your own believes... even if you take out the whole blaming the victim... the whole thing seems like an excuse to reestablish yourself as the center of the universe... a sort of reverting back to childhood
But in some sense, you are the center of your Universe. Sure, its the universe you perceive rather than the Universe that IS... but we only ever experience the former... the latter might be quarks, strings, branes or very small cats that are both dead and alive at the same time. :lulz:
listen the ONLY reason why law of attraction works sometimes is cause it makes people define their goals - something most people don't do - which makes it more likely they will do something to gain whatever they want - well that and everyone knows if you have negative attitude things usually don't work for you
thats it
and if you actually observe the universe, and use your rational you release very quickly that you are NOT the center of the universe.. your perception idea doesn't hold out because can just as easily mean that your not critically observing what is around you
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on March 05, 2009, 07:01:16 PM
listen the ONLY reason why law of attraction works is cause it makes people define their goals - something most people don't do - which makes it more likely they will do something to gain whatever they want
thats it
and if you actually observe the universe, and use your rational you release very quickly that you are NOT the center of the universe.. your perception idea doesn't hold out because can just as easily mean that your not critically observing what is around you
I would argue that it helps them set goals AND it helps them modifies their perceptions to find ways to accomplish those goals AND it gives them the impetus to SEIZE the moment to achieve those goals.
I was deep in 'observer created reality' at one point a few years back. I was reading Wilson, Alli, Sirius, Farber, Hine, Carroll, etc etc etc and I decided that since all of those people were alive, I WOULD interact with them. I did rituals and focused on the idea that I would be chatting with Bob Wilson or Peter Carroll. 6 months later I was the Tech Guy at Maybe Logic, chatting online and on the phone with ALL of them. Granted, since meeting them personally I've lost respect for a few of them... but thats another issue ;-)
I don't think that LoA made it come true because the Universe changed... I do think that the focus, the ritual, the belief helped me to take advantage of situations that put me in a position where I could achieve the goal. So, I think we do live in an observer created reality in some sense... not in the sense that I created the Barstool with my mind powerz, but I did get to fly to CA and hang out with Wilson before he died, because I created the reality where that could happen (in some sense).
I think we are going to have agree to disagree cause I would have to start doing drugs again just to understand what you were getting at...
you do have the same belief system as my ex, and I didn't think it made sense then either
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on March 05, 2009, 07:18:45 PM
I think we are going to have agree to disagree cause I would have to start doing drugs again just to understand what you were getting at...
you do have the same belief system as my ex, and I didn't think it made sense then either
What belief system?
Let me try to restate:
Rat wants to have X happen in his reality (where X is finding 5's, 23's, quarters, or hanging out with counterculture heroes)
Rat then focuses on X regularly, embedding the desire for X into his subconscious
Rat's subconscious starts filtering for X.
When Rat's subconscious sees something that may get Rat closer to X, it throws up a big red flag and say "HEY SCHMUCK! LOOK AT THIS".
Then Rat says "OICWUTUDIDTHAR"
Eventually Rat lives in a Universe where X is true, because he made it true.
It doesn't work for everything, because LoA is not really true. It's just useful for some people.
Real Reality may drop a load of Lemons on the Observer... but the Observer creates the reality where lemons=lemonade or lemons= terrible lunch.
Even in a horrific situation, let us say, Rape. Real Reality is where some innocent person is raped. The Observer Created Reality is where that person lives afterward. The rape was not their fault, that the rape completely destroyed their life, that they got hooked on Heroin to avoid thinking about it and that they comitted suicide in the end... happens in their observer created reality.
I like RAW's comment that Reality is "Interactive Processes" or a "Causal feedback Loop"... Shit Happens and we interact with the Shit, our interaction can make it less shitty or more shitty.
The Shit is not our fault. Rolling around in it is.
Now having said that I really hope to hear peoples opinions on the law of attraction...
mainly cause I find it interesting.
The way I see it this taking petty superstitions as spiritual reality, this blend of materialism, commercialism and marketable talking points, this idea that ones opinions is more important then what we can prove through prediction and observations, this almost mocking of people being good without reward, as practically the same thing as what we see in the sort of extreme religiousness in a fragment of Western Society. The Secret kind of presents it in a warm fuzzy way, but it kind of the same thing. Sort of answers are good, questions are bad.... simplicity over doubt...
I don't know why I find it interesting... still haven't got back to on any science studies done on the subject... and I don't wanna email my sister for some (she'll laugh at me for even asking the question)
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 05, 2009, 07:38:07 PM
I like RAW's comment that Reality is "Interactive Processes" or a "Causal feedback Loop"... Shit Happens and we interact with the Shit, our interaction can make it less shitty or more shitty.
The Shit is not our fault. Rolling around in it is.
I think i kind of what your getting at...
My concern with that line of thinking is that it might lead some to reconstruct what is actually there to fit what they think is there. A sort of losing touch with what is real - an extreme case of this (and Im only using this cause it is an extreme case and easy to understand) are the fundies who are absolutely convinced that science supports their interpretation of the bible...
I guess that is my main concern. That when life actually happens some might lose prospective in interpreting through what they experienced before hand then using deduction and research.
ACCKK
This is why I hate philosophic discussions. I suck at it so much
:lol:
But the thing is Rat, you're not using LoA, you're using Lo5... Because you know it's an internal process, and not an external (i.e. you change to see the universe differently, not the universe changes to your whim).
And your JW example doesn't apply, because you were debating Game Rules over what it is to "be a Christian", not whether the bible explained how the universe worked.
Saying "hell doesn't exist because it's not in the bible" is much different than saying "the earth is 6000 years old because it's in the bible."
One is a game rule in the religion, the other is making a statement about the universe.
Saying the LoA works is one thing. Saying it works because of Quantum is another.
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on March 05, 2009, 07:58:41 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 05, 2009, 07:38:07 PM
I like RAW's comment that Reality is "Interactive Processes" or a "Causal feedback Loop"... Shit Happens and we interact with the Shit, our interaction can make it less shitty or more shitty.
The Shit is not our fault. Rolling around in it is.
I think i kind of what your getting at...
My concern with that line of thinking is that it might lead some to reconstruct what is actually there to fit what they think is there. A sort of losing touch with what is real - an extreme case of this (and Im only using this cause it is an extreme case and easy to understand) are the fundies who are absolutely convinced that science supports their interpretation of the bible...
I guess that is my main concern. That when life actually happens some might lose prospective in interpreting through what they experienced before hand then using deduction and research.
ACCKK
This is why I hate philosophic discussions. I suck at it so much
:lol:
I thought you made good points...
You're right of course, any model if confused with reality is a terrible idea. It's bad if you think 100% User Created Reality is Really Real or that 100% everything is related to 5, or 100% that everything in Reality must be observable and measurable (as opposed to "everything we humans can grok in reality must be observable and measurable). That's why I like being model agnostic. Rather than say Model is True, I can just say "How is Model Useful?" Yes, it sucks for those sods that really believe it, but if it was this it would be Scientology or UFO's or the Illuminati or Jesus or Muhammad or some other nonsense that they decide to really real for realz believe.
As I said before, I was concerned by people believing lies and how those lies affected their view of the World... all the while believing lies and letting them affect my world. Maybe we all believe whatever it is that gets us through the day and when something stops getting us through the day, we go find something else to believe.
Colbert had a conservative on last night and was doing a bit about WHAT IF *insert terrible thing here* happened in the next few years. He ended with the worst scenario of all, what if Obama's stimulus works, what if his plan makes things improve by 2012... and the guy responded "I'd have to rethink everything I believe in".
That was how I felt in 2000 when I lost my faith in Jehovah. I had to rethink everything. Since then, I've always thought I was lucky that I found the PD and Discordianism and Bob before I got stuck with some other stupid belief system.
Sometimes though, I have to wonder if this is nothing more than yet another stupid belief system. Maybe that's all there is, hairless monkeys with random chemical reactions bouncing about in their cranium, grabbing onto one silly belief system after another... with none of them being anything more than wankery.
:horrormirth:
Then I go get stoned and do something useful :lulz:
Quote from: LMNO redux on March 05, 2009, 08:12:34 PM
But the thing is Rat, you're not using LoA, you're using Lo5... Because you know it's an internal process, and not an external (i.e. you change to see the universe differently, not the universe changes to your whim).
At this point in my life, I do think that its an internal process. However, at the point in my life when it happened... I still didn't understand that very well at all. I was still trying to figure it out. Hell, I'd say my experiences at MLA with RAW and the rest of the gang contributed significantly to my greater understanding of the 'observer created reality'.
Quote
And your JW example doesn't apply, because you were debating Game Rules over what it is to "be a Christian", not whether the bible explained how the universe worked.
Saying "hell doesn't exist because it's not in the bible" is much different than saying "the earth is 6000 years old because it's in the bible."
One is a game rule in the religion, the other is making a statement about the universe.
I don't disagree with that... My point wasn't that they were equal statements... Only that I was sure of True and False and felt it was necessary to tell people that their were beliefs were FALSE, while completely ignoring the fact that MY beliefs were false as well.
Quote
Saying the LoA works is one thing. Saying it works because of Quantum is another.
I agree almost completely, but I would make one adjustment:
Quote
Saying the LoA works is one thing, saying it works because of Quantum is another, actually BELIEVING that LoA is due to Quantum Multiverses is a whole different and scary thing.
It's like Crowley. Syaing that you're climbing the tree of life is one thing, saying that you are in Malkuth is another; but really believing that you're gonna get teh MAJICKS POWERZ when you reach Kether is a whole different and scary thing.
;-)
Quote from: Cain on March 05, 2009, 06:30:39 PM
The conclusion is what really bothers me about the whole Law of Attraction. Its basically an excuse to sneer at people suffering through no fault of their own, and plays directly into Horatio Alger-esque bullshit fantasies.
I just wanna say
if you or someone you know ever gets cancer from no fault of their own and some "new ager" hints it was because of negative thoughts...
kick that person in the groin
it will be worth any negative karma coming your way
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 05, 2009, 08:22:22 PM
Quote
Saying the LoA works is one thing, saying it works because of Quantum is another, actually BELIEVING that LoA is due to Quantum Multiverses is a whole different and scary thing.
And so we come back around. If you believe in LoA, you're "actually BELIEVING that LoA is due to Quantum Multiverses."
If you're using the LoA techniques, but don't think you're tangibly affecting the universe around you, then you're using Lo5.
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on March 05, 2009, 08:24:10 PM
Quote from: Cain on March 05, 2009, 06:30:39 PM
The conclusion is what really bothers me about the whole Law of Attraction. Its basically an excuse to sneer at people suffering through no fault of their own, and plays directly into Horatio Alger-esque bullshit fantasies.
I just wanna say
if you or someone you know ever gets cancer from no fault of their own and some "new ager" hints it was because of negative thoughts...
kick that person in the groin
it will be worth any negative karma coming your way
QFT!
Quote from: LMNO redux on March 05, 2009, 08:29:14 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 05, 2009, 08:22:22 PM
Quote
Saying the LoA works is one thing, saying it works because of Quantum is another, actually BELIEVING that LoA is due to Quantum Multiverses is a whole different and scary thing.
And so we come back around. If you believe in LoA, you're "actually BELIEVING that LoA is due to Quantum Multiverses."
If you're using the LoA techniques, but don't think you're tangibly affecting the universe around you, then you're using Lo5.
I think you and I agree that the effect is likely caused by the same mechanism. My point, however, is that the 'belief' in LoA is the psychological HOOK that makes mechanism work for some people... if they didn't believe it, if they thought the techniques were just 'sleight of mind' then it might well fail for them because the "Psychic Censor" would say "No, that is not possible".
Like any other majidicks. Some people can work with Chaos Magic and say "It's all in the mind" and some people can work with High Ritual Magic and think its something else, and some poor sods are Wiccan and think the God and Goddess are really real for realz.
Some people can talk to the Holy Guardian Angel, some can talk to aliens from Sirius, some can talk to the BVM. Some people can accomplish things through using the Law of Fives. Some people can accomplish things through believing in the Law of Attraction... maybe they're all doing the same thing in the end though.
I guess its like two maps, one that shows the territory and has labels like "Filter" "Grid" "Iron Bars" "Shrapnel" etc and one that has "Hyre Theyr BE Draygonnes Named Quantus and Mechanicus. If I'm taking a trip, I'll probably pass on the Drayghonnes map because I find the other symbols more meaningful to me.
For a lot of people though, they just want a label for the big question mark. Call it X or Y or God or Quanta or Reality Grids, labels is labels.
I'm just glad that most of us around here like similar labels ;-)
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 05, 2009, 09:08:52 PM
I think you and I agree that the effect is likely caused by the same mechanism. My point, however, is that the 'belief' in LoA is the psychological HOOK that makes mechanism work for some people... if they didn't believe it, if they thought the techniques were just 'sleight of mind' then it might well fail for them because the "Psychic Censor" would say "No, that is not possible".
Like any other majidicks. Some people can work with Chaos Magic and say "It's all in the mind" and some people can work with High Ritual Magic and think its something else, and some poor sods are Wiccan and think the God and Goddess are really real for realz.
Some people can talk to the Holy Guardian Angel, some can talk to aliens from Sirius, some can talk to the BVM. Some people can accomplish things through using the Law of Fives. Some people can accomplish things through believing in the Law of Attraction... maybe they're all doing the same thing in the end though.
I guess its like two maps, one that shows the territory and has labels like "Filter" "Grid" "Iron Bars" "Shrapnel" etc and one that has "Hyre Theyr BE Draygonnes Named Quantus and Mechanicus. If I'm taking a trip, I'll probably pass on the Drayghonnes map because I find the other symbols more meaningful to me.
For a lot of people though, they just want a label for the big question mark. Call it X or Y or God or Quanta or Reality Grids, labels is labels.
I'm just glad that most of us around here like similar labels ;-)
I don't quite get what you're saying. You say you don't believe in the LoA, but you think it works for some people? How can it work for people if it's not real?
Quote from: Tempest Virago on March 05, 2009, 09:14:55 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 05, 2009, 09:08:52 PM
I think you and I agree that the effect is likely caused by the same mechanism. My point, however, is that the 'belief' in LoA is the psychological HOOK that makes mechanism work for some people... if they didn't believe it, if they thought the techniques were just 'sleight of mind' then it might well fail for them because the "Psychic Censor" would say "No, that is not possible".
Like any other majidicks. Some people can work with Chaos Magic and say "It's all in the mind" and some people can work with High Ritual Magic and think its something else, and some poor sods are Wiccan and think the God and Goddess are really real for realz.
Some people can talk to the Holy Guardian Angel, some can talk to aliens from Sirius, some can talk to the BVM. Some people can accomplish things through using the Law of Fives. Some people can accomplish things through believing in the Law of Attraction... maybe they're all doing the same thing in the end though.
I guess its like two maps, one that shows the territory and has labels like "Filter" "Grid" "Iron Bars" "Shrapnel" etc and one that has "Hyre Theyr BE Draygonnes Named Quantus and Mechanicus. If I'm taking a trip, I'll probably pass on the Drayghonnes map because I find the other symbols more meaningful to me.
For a lot of people though, they just want a label for the big question mark. Call it X or Y or God or Quanta or Reality Grids, labels is labels.
I'm just glad that most of us around here like similar labels ;-)
I don't quite get what you're saying. You say you don't believe in the LoA, but you think it works for some people? How can it work for people if it's not real?
First, I don't believe in anything. Or at least, I try really hard not to ;-)
II think that there is a bunch of information in the universe and some of it can be perceived by human beings through their five senses.
The information that can be perceived then passes through the neurological system, where it is filtered and manipulated by our beliefs, ideas, programs etc. leaving us with some smaller chunk of information.
That information is then processed consciously.
The Lo5's and the LoA directly impact the second step. That is they are filters and programs that are designed to 'look' for specific criteria.
So, if I want X to happen and I believe in the Law of Attraction. I will focus on that X happening (I will create a new program/filter in my neurological system). Thus when stuff that can help me get to X happens, the brain lights up throws a big red flag and says "ATTRACTION!"
The Law of Fives, in my opinion, is much nicer because it acknowledges that all of this is in our heads. The Law of Attraction, however, has the advantage of a 'belief system' which people can hang on to. Beliefs can make very strong filters, unfortunately, beliefs can also make people confuse their 'filter' for Really Real Reality (which is why (i think) LMNO is arguing against the LoA).
The Law of Attraction is 'Real' in some sense. You do have a direct effect on the reality you perceive. Your state of being is partly due to your surroundings and (IMO) mostly to do with how you decide to interact with those surroundings. Minus the QBS (Quantum Bull Shit). That is the Law of Attraction.
Peter Carroll talks about the Psychic Censor, the bit of your brain that interferes and says "HEY, YOU CAN'T DO MAGIC BECAUSE IT ISN'T REAL!!" His system gets around this censor through "sleight of mind" that is, he uses Gnosis, Ritual etc to distract the conscious brain so he can stick a new program in the subconscious brain.
People that believe the Law of Attraction, get around their Censor by lying to it and saying "Oh this is SCIENCE!"
In both models, we can achieve similar results. The advantage of Peter's model is at the end, we can take off the robes and put away the sigils and come play with everyone else in consensual reality. The disadvantage of LoA is that you end up believing nonsense and then saying things like "you got cancer from negative thoughts" which leads to having one's ass kicked.
Slight Sciency talk
Ok my inquiry was answered. The main problem with doing a study on this is that the LoA is that any study can be falsified by the idea itself. So all studies don't matter, because quite brilliantly the language used in LoA doesn't allow for it.
Here's what I mean. If you do a study and show you are just as likely to get better from a disease with or without LoA then the language that is used disproves the study. In LoA you are suppose to focus on being healthy rather then "not" being sick, because in their language "not" being sick is still focusing on being sick. So if someone doesn't get better there is no way to verify if the person is focusing on "not" being sick or focusing on being healthy. The problem with this, as most rational people could see, the two are the same. EVERYTHING HAS A "NOT" COUNTERPART, or is a "not" itself. But since they aren't in LoA language you can't fully disprove what they are saying.
If you can't define what you suppose to look at you can't study it.
What you could do is falsify claims, or lies they make about physics, like if they make an actual claim about quantum physics then a real physicist can say, "No that is now how it works." And that has been done by what little they claim in the secret and there are several books trying to sort out the nonsense in What the Bleep Do We Know?
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on March 05, 2009, 09:49:48 PM
Slight Sciency talk
Ok my inquiry was answered. The main problem with doing a study on this is that the LoA is that any study can be falsified by the idea itself. So all studies don't matter, because quite brilliantly the language used in LoA doesn't allow for it.
Here's what I mean. If you do a study and show you are just as likely to get better from a disease with or without LoA then the language that is used disproves the study. In LoA you are suppose to focus on being healthy rather then "not" being sick, because in their language "not" being sick is still focusing on being sick. So if someone doesn't get better there is no way to verify if the person is focusing on "not" being sick or focusing on being healthy. The problem with this, as most rational people could see, the two are the same. EVERYTHING HAS A "NOT" COUNTERPART, or is a "not" itself. But since they aren't in LoA language you can't fully disprove what they are saying.
If you can't define what you suppose to look at you can't study it.
What you could do is falsify claims, or lies they make about physics, like if they make an actual claim about quantum physics then a real physicist can say, "No that is now how it works." And that has been done by what little they claim in the secret and there are several books trying to sort out the nonsense in What the Bleep Do We Know?
:mittens:
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 05, 2009, 09:47:02 PM
First, I don't believe in anything. Or at least, I try really hard not to ;-)
II think that there is a bunch of information in the universe and some of it can be perceived by human beings through their five senses.
The information that can be perceived then passes through the neurological system, where it is filtered and manipulated by our beliefs, ideas, programs etc. leaving us with some smaller chunk of information.
That information is then processed consciously.
The Lo5's and the LoA directly impact the second step. That is they are filters and programs that are designed to 'look' for specific criteria.
So, if I want X to happen and I believe in the Law of Attraction. I will focus on that X happening (I will create a new program/filter in my neurological system). Thus when stuff that can help me get to X happens, the brain lights up throws a big red flag and says "ATTRACTION!"
The Law of Fives, in my opinion, is much nicer because it acknowledges that all of this is in our heads. The Law of Attraction, however, has the advantage of a 'belief system' which people can hang on to. Beliefs can make very strong filters, unfortunately, beliefs can also make people confuse their 'filter' for Really Real Reality (which is why (i think) LMNO is arguing against the LoA).
The Law of Attraction is 'Real' in some sense. You do have a direct effect on the reality you perceive. Your state of being is partly due to your surroundings and (IMO) mostly to do with how you decide to interact with those surroundings. Minus the QBS (Quantum Bull Shit). That is the Law of Attraction.
Peter Carroll talks about the Psychic Censor, the bit of your brain that interferes and says "HEY, YOU CAN'T DO MAGIC BECAUSE IT ISN'T REAL!!" His system gets around this censor through "sleight of mind" that is, he uses Gnosis, Ritual etc to distract the conscious brain so he can stick a new program in the subconscious brain.
People that believe the Law of Attraction, get around their Censor by lying to it and saying "Oh this is SCIENCE!"
In both models, we can achieve similar results. The advantage of Peter's model is at the end, we can take off the robes and put away the sigils and come play with everyone else in consensual reality. The disadvantage of LoA is that you end up believing nonsense and then saying things like "you got cancer from negative thoughts" which leads to having one's ass kicked.
I think we just have different definitions of "real", then, because I basically agree with you - people look for patterns and find them, that's human nature - but I don't think that believing in the LoA actually HELPS them happen. It's just that if they coincidentally happen, people will use that as proof that they're right, which is also human nature.
I mean, I do believe that, for example, thinking you're going to get a job makes you confident and if that confidence comes out in a job interview, you're more likely to be hired, but that's not really the same thing.
Quote from: Tempest Virago on March 05, 2009, 10:10:25 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 05, 2009, 09:47:02 PM
First, I don't believe in anything. Or at least, I try really hard not to ;-)
II think that there is a bunch of information in the universe and some of it can be perceived by human beings through their five senses.
The information that can be perceived then passes through the neurological system, where it is filtered and manipulated by our beliefs, ideas, programs etc. leaving us with some smaller chunk of information.
That information is then processed consciously.
The Lo5's and the LoA directly impact the second step. That is they are filters and programs that are designed to 'look' for specific criteria.
So, if I want X to happen and I believe in the Law of Attraction. I will focus on that X happening (I will create a new program/filter in my neurological system). Thus when stuff that can help me get to X happens, the brain lights up throws a big red flag and says "ATTRACTION!"
The Law of Fives, in my opinion, is much nicer because it acknowledges that all of this is in our heads. The Law of Attraction, however, has the advantage of a 'belief system' which people can hang on to. Beliefs can make very strong filters, unfortunately, beliefs can also make people confuse their 'filter' for Really Real Reality (which is why (i think) LMNO is arguing against the LoA).
The Law of Attraction is 'Real' in some sense. You do have a direct effect on the reality you perceive. Your state of being is partly due to your surroundings and (IMO) mostly to do with how you decide to interact with those surroundings. Minus the QBS (Quantum Bull Shit). That is the Law of Attraction.
Peter Carroll talks about the Psychic Censor, the bit of your brain that interferes and says "HEY, YOU CAN'T DO MAGIC BECAUSE IT ISN'T REAL!!" His system gets around this censor through "sleight of mind" that is, he uses Gnosis, Ritual etc to distract the conscious brain so he can stick a new program in the subconscious brain.
People that believe the Law of Attraction, get around their Censor by lying to it and saying "Oh this is SCIENCE!"
In both models, we can achieve similar results. The advantage of Peter's model is at the end, we can take off the robes and put away the sigils and come play with everyone else in consensual reality. The disadvantage of LoA is that you end up believing nonsense and then saying things like "you got cancer from negative thoughts" which leads to having one's ass kicked.
I think we just have different definitions of "real", then, because I basically agree with you - people look for patterns and find them, that's human nature - but I don't think that believing in the LoA actually HELPS them happen. It's just that if they coincidentally happen, people will use that as proof that they're right, which is also human nature.
I mean, I do believe that, for example, thinking you're going to get a job makes you confident and if that confidence comes out in a job interview, you're more likely to be hired, but that's not really the same thing.
But it IS the same thing, buried at a deeper level of the subconscious. It's what makes you like certain sodas over others, and guides your kinks (prospective mating choice grids).
While mucking about with it in your head, the Censor concept pops up. The Be
lief that the [LoA/Lo5s] is a valid game rule of reality (even if held temporarily, as in Carroll's system, or permanently, as in the loA QuantumBS adherent) _does_ serve to distract the Censor and increase the 'hit-rate' of the pattern searching... at least according to those who've done the experiments on themselves.
Lo5
written like that it reminds me more of line of sight then law of fives
Ok, maybe I should be more abstract, or something.
I understand and agree that RAW, AC, and the rest of those freaks have instructed that in order to make it (LoA) work, you have to fully believe in it. You have to convince your subconcious that LoA really exists. Which is all well and good, because then they tell you to stop believing in it and anaylze the data.
Which means they're wrapping it up in Lo5. Because Lo5 can be rephrased as, "if you believe in any system of patterns deeply enough, it will affect how you perceive and experience the universe." It doesn't say that any one pattern system is True, it describes what happens when you believe in one.
So the LoA is "real" in the sense that it's a fairy tale that, in order to work, you have to believe is true. But it's still a fairy tale. It's a psychological trick, whose strength comes from lying to your own brain.
Quote from: Telarus on March 06, 2009, 03:19:09 AM
Quote from: Tempest Virago on March 05, 2009, 10:10:25 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 05, 2009, 09:47:02 PM
First, I don't believe in anything. Or at least, I try really hard not to ;-)
II think that there is a bunch of information in the universe and some of it can be perceived by human beings through their five senses.
The information that can be perceived then passes through the neurological system, where it is filtered and manipulated by our beliefs, ideas, programs etc. leaving us with some smaller chunk of information.
That information is then processed consciously.
The Lo5's and the LoA directly impact the second step. That is they are filters and programs that are designed to 'look' for specific criteria.
So, if I want X to happen and I believe in the Law of Attraction. I will focus on that X happening (I will create a new program/filter in my neurological system). Thus when stuff that can help me get to X happens, the brain lights up throws a big red flag and says "ATTRACTION!"
The Law of Fives, in my opinion, is much nicer because it acknowledges that all of this is in our heads. The Law of Attraction, however, has the advantage of a 'belief system' which people can hang on to. Beliefs can make very strong filters, unfortunately, beliefs can also make people confuse their 'filter' for Really Real Reality (which is why (i think) LMNO is arguing against the LoA).
The Law of Attraction is 'Real' in some sense. You do have a direct effect on the reality you perceive. Your state of being is partly due to your surroundings and (IMO) mostly to do with how you decide to interact with those surroundings. Minus the QBS (Quantum Bull Shit). That is the Law of Attraction.
Peter Carroll talks about the Psychic Censor, the bit of your brain that interferes and says "HEY, YOU CAN'T DO MAGIC BECAUSE IT ISN'T REAL!!" His system gets around this censor through "sleight of mind" that is, he uses Gnosis, Ritual etc to distract the conscious brain so he can stick a new program in the subconscious brain.
People that believe the Law of Attraction, get around their Censor by lying to it and saying "Oh this is SCIENCE!"
In both models, we can achieve similar results. The advantage of Peter's model is at the end, we can take off the robes and put away the sigils and come play with everyone else in consensual reality. The disadvantage of LoA is that you end up believing nonsense and then saying things like "you got cancer from negative thoughts" which leads to having one's ass kicked.
I think we just have different definitions of "real", then, because I basically agree with you - people look for patterns and find them, that's human nature - but I don't think that believing in the LoA actually HELPS them happen. It's just that if they coincidentally happen, people will use that as proof that they're right, which is also human nature.
I mean, I do believe that, for example, thinking you're going to get a job makes you confident and if that confidence comes out in a job interview, you're more likely to be hired, but that's not really the same thing.
But it IS the same thing, buried at a deeper level of the subconscious. It's what makes you like certain sodas over others, and guides your kinks (prospective mating choice grids).
While mucking about with it in your head, the Censor concept pops up. The Belief that the [LoA/Lo5s] is a valid game rule of reality (even if held temporarily, as in Carroll's system, or permanently, as in the loA QuantumBS adherent) _does_ serve to distract the Censor and increase the 'hit-rate' of the pattern searching... at least according to those who've done the experiments on themselves.
I don't know, I'm still not convinced it's the same thing. And maybe I'm just being dumb again, but how exactly is soda preference related to the Law of Attraction?
The only choices of soda in your home fridge are those you have Willed there.
Self-limited Free Will (The Lo5s, slight of mind, etc, etc serve as tricks to program your own Degrees of Freedom during a situation some of the Closed Degrees of Freedom come from The Situation... many come from Your Programming).
If you believe that stripping naked and running around an airport will get you arrested, and you care about getting arrested.... you won't do it.
The Law of Attraction says that if you really, really, really want to meet that cute security guard over there... well, then maybe running with that idea would be the most expedient thing to do. But slinging around slight of mind like that means you're going to have to back it up with further NLP/meta-programming so that you end up with her phone#, and not a mugshot#.
Actually, that's not what LoA says. That's what you want it to say. It actually says that if you wish for something in a certain way, the external universe will warp itself to accomodate you.
Well, granted,... but that's brain-dead newage theosophical bullshit, and I'm a Paradigmal Pirate. :lol:
That said, I agree that the Law of 5s communicates the underlying principle in a much more effective way, as it includes an appropriate occult 'reveal'.
The Law of Attraction, as popularized, is indeed designed to be just vague enough to sell it to anyone, and then just shrug at them and tell them it's their problem that the Universe didn't manifest what they wanted it to. The real trap is deluding yourself into thinking that the LoA is a game rule at the level of Gravity or the Weak or Strong Force, and not a Game Rule at the level of seeing ships in the clouds, or moire patterns in mesh screens, or a predators face in the jungle leaves.
Quote from: Telarus on March 07, 2009, 01:09:47 AM
The only choices of soda in your home fridge are those you have Willed there.
Self-limited Free Will (The Lo5s, slight of mind, etc, etc serve as tricks to program your own Degrees of Freedom during a situation some of the Closed Degrees of Freedom come from The Situation... many come from Your Programming).
If you believe that stripping naked and running around an airport will get you arrested, and you care about getting arrested.... you won't do it.
The Law of Attraction says that if you really, really, really want to meet that cute security guard over there... well, then maybe running with that idea would be the most expedient thing to do. But slinging around slight of mind like that means you're going to have to back it up with further NLP/meta-programming so that you end up with her phone#, and not a mugshot#.
It doesn't matter if you believe that that will get you arrested, though. You can
believe it will get you elected king of the world, but it will still get you arrested.
Relatedly, tonight I was playing Mario Party with some friends and they told me the reason I kept losing the pure chance games is because I don't believe in luck. :argh!:
We mistake the game for actuality.
There are, in fact, very few acknowledged hard & fast rules when it comes to our existence. Systems of belief & uncertainty. Maybe we've become a wee bit better at asking the questions is all?
When we are young children, it's less likely to mistake the game for actuality because it all seems like a game. Life seems to be all about curiosity & the desire to know more, about ourselves, this place we call home, other people, what our minds & bodies can do, language, arts & sciences, all of these games we can play & we do. Children seem to have this uncanny ability to change their minds almost continually. New information comes in all forms, thru other people, studies, observations, experimentation, stories, myths, the culture we are raised within, learning tips & shortcuts, how to use tools & resources, et cetera. We take all these little pieces of the great cosmic puzzle & put them together & take them apart, again & again & again. We put one together & find pieces left over & start another one, & so on.
As people get older they often become more rigid, less likely to change their minds. Why? Lots of reasons, I suppose. When we are young, the line between what is "real" & what is "fantasy" is often blurred but it doesn't seem to irk as much. The mind is still flexible, able to contain certain ideas or notions along with opposing viewpoints. People in general seem to be inherently more or less literal in their interpretations & that comes into play as well, I think. Children are able to go back & forth with these games without being very troubled about the inconsistencies. Like the young of any species who play around with each other & with these games & thereby learn.
Children, as they mature, seem to be an amalgamation of all these games they play, roles & games they're taught & ones they pick up by & by. Certain cultures seem to encourage this sort of game or role-playing, fostering creative & critical thinking, other cultures seem to discourage. However, in all cultures & at some point, it appears that children are expected to stop having wonder about some things. This wonder-stop seems to come along right around the time they are encouraged to find their very own niche in the system. Well, & you can go on wondering & wandering, but for heaven's sake, don't talk & don't tell! You'll get squashed. & not by those who will even take the time to consider your views but by those who don't want their own Systems of Belief shook up too much.
Many of our educational systems seem to be centered on teaching WHAT to think rather than HOW to think. Granted, a base of knowledge is required & teaching critical & creative thinking skills is not as easy perhaps. Certainly not impossible tho if that's what you are trying to do. Memorization of facts might be necessary but the abstraction of thoughts leads to new, sometimes improved (& sometimes disturbing to the status quo) ideas.
Throughout history we've been able to extend our natural lifespans but still these Systems of Belief outlive any of even the oldest human beings alive. We have longer gestation/maturation periods than most other forms of life. This, perhaps, is one of the reasons we are able to adapt to our environments? In order to survive as a species, we need to care for our young. The fact we are required to care for our young for longer spans of time comes into play as well, I think. We have this ability to adapt & I grapple with what that even means? The ability to adapt may increase our ability to survive but at what cost? I honestly don't know. How would I know?
I guess what I am trying to say here (longwinded too, like thinking out loud) is that much of what was expressed here itt got me to thinking about these things. The way my mind seems to work is that moving forward, much is left behind as new stuff takes its place. "You can't go home again." Systems of belief can be like games. They may help you to understand how things work but you have to leave them behind at some point, especially if they're no fun anymore or aren't working. & the rules of these games are pretty much imaginary or self-imposed or anyhow somehow enforced. Half the fun is gone when you figure out what the rules are.
So many games, so little time.
:mittens:
TGRR,
Loving the thread where Honey explains absolutely everything there is worth knowing about anything.
yeah I did go off on a few (million) tangents, thanks for reading tho.
Quote from: Honey on March 07, 2009, 05:10:00 PM
yeah I did go off on a few (million) tangents, thanks for reading tho.
Hush. That was amazing.
Quote from: Honey on March 07, 2009, 03:32:23 PM
As people get older they often become more rigid, less likely to change their minds. Why? Lots of reasons, I suppose. When we are young, the line between what is "real" & what is "fantasy" is often blurred but it doesn't seem to irk as much. The mind is still flexible, able to contain certain ideas or notions along with opposing viewpoints. People in general seem to be inherently more or less literal in their interpretations & that comes into play as well, I think. Children are able to go back & forth with these games without being very troubled about the inconsistencies. Like the young of any species who play around with each other & with these games & thereby learn.
Children, as they mature, seem to be an amalgamation of all these games they play, roles & games they're taught & ones they pick up by & by. Certain cultures seem to encourage this sort of game or role-playing, fostering creative & critical thinking, other cultures seem to discourage. However, in all cultures & at some point, it appears that children are expected to stop having wonder about some things. This wonder-stop seems to come along right around the time they are encouraged to find their very own niche in the system. Well, & you can go on wondering & wandering, but for heaven's sake, don't talk & don't tell! You'll get squashed. & not by those who will even take the time to consider your views but by those who don't want their own Systems of Belief shook up too much.
I really think the same thing when thinking about childhood curiosity - but I think wonder works well too.
wow, That was really good Honey
Quote from: Honey on March 07, 2009, 03:32:23 PM
We mistake the game for actuality.
There are, in fact, very few acknowledged hard & fast rules when it comes to our existence. Systems of belief & uncertainty. Maybe we've become a wee bit better at asking the questions is all?
When we are young children, it's less likely to mistake the game for actuality because it all seems like a game. Life seems to be all about curiosity & the desire to know more, about ourselves, this place we call home, other people, what our minds & bodies can do, language, arts & sciences, all of these games we can play & we do. Children seem to have this uncanny ability to change their minds almost continually. New information comes in all forms, thru other people, studies, observations, experimentation, stories, myths, the culture we are raised within, learning tips & shortcuts, how to use tools & resources, et cetera. We take all these little pieces of the great cosmic puzzle & put them together & take them apart, again & again & again. We put one together & find pieces left over & start another one, & so on.
As people get older they often become more rigid, less likely to change their minds. Why? Lots of reasons, I suppose. When we are young, the line between what is "real" & what is "fantasy" is often blurred but it doesn't seem to irk as much. The mind is still flexible, able to contain certain ideas or notions along with opposing viewpoints. People in general seem to be inherently more or less literal in their interpretations & that comes into play as well, I think. Children are able to go back & forth with these games without being very troubled about the inconsistencies. Like the young of any species who play around with each other & with these games & thereby learn.
Children, as they mature, seem to be an amalgamation of all these games they play, roles & games they're taught & ones they pick up by & by. Certain cultures seem to encourage this sort of game or role-playing, fostering creative & critical thinking, other cultures seem to discourage. However, in all cultures & at some point, it appears that children are expected to stop having wonder about some things. This wonder-stop seems to come along right around the time they are encouraged to find their very own niche in the system. Well, & you can go on wondering & wandering, but for heaven's sake, don't talk & don't tell! You'll get squashed. & not by those who will even take the time to consider your views but by those who don't want their own Systems of Belief shook up too much.
Many of our educational systems seem to be centered on teaching WHAT to think rather than HOW to think. Granted, a base of knowledge is required & teaching critical & creative thinking skills is not as easy perhaps. Certainly not impossible tho if that's what you are trying to do. Memorization of facts might be necessary but the abstraction of thoughts leads to new, sometimes improved (& sometimes disturbing to the status quo) ideas.
Throughout history we've been able to extend our natural lifespans but still these Systems of Belief outlive any of even the oldest human beings alive. We have longer gestation/maturation periods than most other forms of life. This, perhaps, is one of the reasons we are able to adapt to our environments? In order to survive as a species, we need to care for our young. The fact we are required to care for our young for longer spans of time comes into play as well, I think. We have this ability to adapt & I grapple with what that even means? The ability to adapt may increase our ability to survive but at what cost? I honestly don't know. How would I know?
I guess what I am trying to say here (longwinded too, like thinking out loud) is that much of what was expressed here itt got me to thinking about these things. The way my mind seems to work is that moving forward, much is left behind as new stuff takes its place. "You can't go home again." Systems of belief can be like games. They may help you to understand how things work but you have to leave them behind at some point, especially if they're no fun anymore or aren't working. & the rules of these games are pretty much imaginary or self-imposed or anyhow somehow enforced. Half the fun is gone when you figure out what the rules are.
So many games, so little time.
I agree with pretty much every sentence of this, and have tried to say similar things before with much, much less eloquence.
Brava, Honey!
:mittens:
Quote
The Secret lists three five required steps — "privilege, ask, believe, receive, beat" — as the essence of the Law of Attraction:
1. Live in a developed country.
2. Know what you want and ask the universe for it.
3. Feel and behave as if the object of your desire is on its way.
4. Be open to receiving it.
5. Kick a bum for not knowing what he wants well enough.
Fixed.
No, India is expensive when compared to Bangladesh.