Personal Development for Smart People Forums - View Single Post

Jehosephat · 02-23-2007, 05:44 PM

After my first readthrough of Steve's article I was highly encouraged about this way of thinking about energizing intentions. I thought about my current intentions in terms of how they flowed through me. After doing this, and finding that these flows were pretty mixed, I read through these posts and through the article once again. Now I'm a bit confused.

Let's say that your intention is to work for yourself by blogging (to use a common example). You could say that your polarity is outward because you are giving to the universe whatever special knowledge you have by blogging it. However, I think it would be naive to say that you don't expect to receive any inflow from the universe. In fact, you have to expect inflow. If you don't earn money, how will you support your continuing contribution? Similarly, if you focus on income, you really can't expect receive that kind of inflow from the universe without producing some kind of outflow to the universe (although I think there this attitude of entitlement that many people have these days).

The analogy to breathing I think makes more sense than polarity (in an electrical sense) If the universe is a circuit that you can cause energy to flow through and through yourself, then the energy flow is independent of polarity. With breathing, I agree that you cannot effectively survive by trying to simultaneously breathe in and out at the same time. However, that doesn't mean you choose only breathing in or only breathing out. Maybe you say 'I'm going to focus on my inhalations today'. This might result in you being more relaxed or whatever, but it doesn't exclude the fact that you will exhale as well.

I'm probably rambling a bit by this point, but I think what I'm getting to is this: I think you can put energy toward things with seemingly opposite polarity. Maybe you don't focus on them simultaneously, but you can do both and have results. So, for the blogging example, you might intend to provide great value to the universe by sharing your knowledge (positive). And then separately you might intend that you gain traffic and revenue by setting up methods (adsense, affiliates, etc.) to do so (negative). You may even perform activities that are congruent with both of these intentions (e.g. spruce up your site to make it more readable to users as well as make more room for ad placement).

So, maybe I'm not reading Steve exactly right here, and I'm hoping that his future article will clear some of this up. One other question I would like to put out there is: What is the polarity of self-improvement? Particularly, if it is a very simple matter of doing it for yourself (i.e. no ulterior motives).

PS I started writing this earlier in the day and I see now that DavidH's post is a fairly good summary of what I'm confused about.

02-23-2007, 05:44 PM	#58 (permalink)
Jehosephat Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 37	Interested and Confused After my first readthrough of Steve's article I was highly encouraged about this way of thinking about energizing intentions. I thought about my current intentions in terms of how they flowed through me. After doing this, and finding that these flows were pretty mixed, I read through these posts and through the article once again. Now I'm a bit confused. Let's say that your intention is to work for yourself by blogging (to use a common example). You could say that your polarity is outward because you are giving to the universe whatever special knowledge you have by blogging it. However, I think it would be naive to say that you don't expect to receive any inflow from the universe. In fact, you have to expect inflow. If you don't earn money, how will you support your continuing contribution? Similarly, if you focus on income, you really can't expect receive that kind of inflow from the universe without producing some kind of outflow to the universe (although I think there this attitude of entitlement that many people have these days). The analogy to breathing I think makes more sense than polarity (in an electrical sense) If the universe is a circuit that you can cause energy to flow through and through yourself, then the energy flow is independent of polarity. With breathing, I agree that you cannot effectively survive by trying to simultaneously breathe in and out at the same time. However, that doesn't mean you choose only breathing in or only breathing out. Maybe you say 'I'm going to focus on my inhalations today'. This might result in you being more relaxed or whatever, but it doesn't exclude the fact that you will exhale as well. I'm probably rambling a bit by this point, but I think what I'm getting to is this: I think you can put energy toward things with seemingly opposite polarity. Maybe you don't focus on them simultaneously, but you can do both and have results. So, for the blogging example, you might intend to provide great value to the universe by sharing your knowledge (positive). And then separately you might intend that you gain traffic and revenue by setting up methods (adsense, affiliates, etc.) to do so (negative). You may even perform activities that are congruent with both of these intentions (e.g. spruce up your site to make it more readable to users as well as make more room for ad placement). So, maybe I'm not reading Steve exactly right here, and I'm hoping that his future article will clear some of this up. One other question I would like to put out there is: What is the polarity of self-improvement? Particularly, if it is a very simple matter of doing it for yourself (i.e. no ulterior motives). PS I started writing this earlier in the day and I see now that DavidH's post is a fairly good summary of what I'm confused about.