The Problem with LoA…

[juicemcnewton]

I'm really confused about this whole subject... Is this to say that if my thoughts and feelings are about getting some food because I'm hungry, then I'll find a way to get some food? Or that food will just appear? Or... what exactly?

What exactly is it that gets attracted into your life? Physical things? Emotions? People? Anything you can imagine?

Oh and I saw somewhere somebody said something about the girl bringing cancer upon herself. Now I'm sure people got cancer long before there was a name for it or before anyone even knew what it was. How could you possibly attract something into your life you have no knowledge of? Of course on the other side, people are going about their lives thinking about how healthy they are and BOOM, suddenly you're on your death bed.

I'm a firm believer that what you think has no bearing on reality.

[cylon]

My question is, at what point does science decide they've figured it all out?

When I fell away from Christianity, I was A N G R Y

at religion. Spent my whole life afraid I would burn for eternity. Not so fun. And I spent a lot of time reading about science, and critical thinking. Very glad I went through this process, otherwise I'd still be worried about Satan. I spent a lot of time on atheist message boards as well, asking questions, debunking the bible, seeing all the BS in it (in my opinion),making fun of Christians. Every time I saw one of those christian fish or calivin stickers on a car, my blood would boil. I had gotten to the point, where I was finally above all these people, these magical thinkers who believed in fairy tales.

And I had a whole new world that was fascinating me. Science, the natural world, evolution, human behavior, so damn awesome. I felt completely free from my horrific religious upbringing. I couldn't stop being fascinated by life and the universe. Then I started getting a little into what I guess is Quantum science, just skimming the surface. Then I became even MORE fascinated with the universe.

At this point, I stopped being mad at christians. I didn't care anymore. They are free to live their lives, and while I still don't agree with that faith, on a personal level, it just doesn't bother me anymore. Live and let live. I've lost all desire to debate them, or prove them wrong. Who cares?

And as I lost my anger, my mind opened a little, now I'm at the point where I can study a subject like this, actually experience it in my life, and be even more freaking fascinated. It's insane how mind bogglingly cool I think the universe is right now, the sense of peace it gives me... don't know.

There is a point in there, I think.

[Mark Lapierre]

Originally Posted by Uplift

It is a fact that records are broken.

I'm not questioning that. My point was that thought leading to breaking records is not comparable to thought leading to being raped, for example.

Originally Posted by Uplift

Before taking your advice, what are the certain limits of our universe, and how did you discover them?

There are many, so I'll just give one example. Solid matter can't pass through other solid matter. I've found this out many times throughout my life when I've put stuff on desks, or walked across various surfaces, or run into a wall or a pane of glass. And I've experienced the consequences when I've punched a wall, or put my foot through a door while chasing after my brother. I also learned about state of matter, and how different types of matter interact, and how they change from one state to another, and how that changes the ways in which they interact. Discovery via personal experience and learned knowledge.

Originally Posted by juicemcnewton

I'm really confused about this whole subject... Is this to say that if my thoughts and feelings are about getting some food because I'm hungry, then I'll find a way to get some food? Or that food will just appear? Or... what exactly?

The extreme version is that yes, thinking about food will make food appear. The realistic version is that thinking about food will lead you to take action to get that food, and no amount of thinking, no matter how well aligned your subconscious and conscious thought processes are, will make food appear unless you get off the couch and go to the fridge.

Originally Posted by juicemcnewton

What exactly is it that gets attracted into your life? Physical things? Emotions? People? Anything you can imagine?

Again, extreme version: anything you can think of in a focused, coherent manner, using your entire consciousness, not just the conscious thought that most people think of as consciousness. Realistic version: Anything you take action to get, limited by what's possible, and by what you think is possible (which may not be the same)

Originally Posted by cylon

My question is, at what point does science decide they've figured it all out?

Short answer: never. Slightly longer answer: science is partly a process of learning all that there is to learn. That means that if there are any questions left unanswered, scientists still have work to do.

[ZHereford]

Originally Posted by cylon

My question is, at what point does science decide they've figured it all out?

Science is a process for evaluating empirical knowledge which means we can only know what we can test and observe through our senses. As humans we can never jump out of our skins and claim to know reality in any other way beyond our ability to observe it and test it. Therefore we will never have it figured out in the absolute sense, despite claims to the contrary.

[juicemcnewton]

Ok so if I understand you correctly Mark, the realistic version of LOA... is... That if I do something which would normally lead to a certain event occuring.. That event will occur? That seems so obvious that I have to assume most LOA people believe in the extreme version right?

I think I'm clear on it now, thanks Mark.

[cylon]

Originally Posted by ZHereford

Science is a process for evaluating empirical knowledge which means we can only know what we can test and observe through our senses. As humans we can never jump out of our skins and claim to know reality in any other way beyond our ability to observe it and test it. Therefore we will never have it figured out in the absolute sense, despite claims to the contrary.

I know what science is.

But humans CAN claim to know reality, for themselves, by observing what we can through our senses. People test things all the time, for themselves... that's why people have disagreements about so many things to begin with. Different people having different experiences, different observations.

Maybe we aren't disagreeing here. But maybe the difference is, on a personal level, some people don't need to have things explained to them if it's contrary to their own experience. This is where things like intuition come in I suppose.

[ZHereford]

Originally Posted by cylon

Maybe we aren't disagreeing here.

No we're not!

I didn't mean to suggest you didn't know what science it, I merely wanted to establish a point of reference.

[Uplift]

Originally Posted by Mark Lapierre

I'm not questioning that. My point was that thought leading to breaking records is not comparable to thought leading to being raped, for example.

There are many, so I'll just give one example. Solid matter can't pass through other solid matter. I've found this out many times throughout my life when I've put stuff on desks, or walked across various surfaces, or run into a wall or a pane of glass. And I've experienced the consequences when I've punched a wall, or put my foot through a door while chasing after my brother. I also learned about state of matter, and how different types of matter interact, and how they change from one state to another, and how that changes the ways in which they interact. Discovery via personal experience and learned knowledge.

So if someone experiences something different to you, their experience is less valid than yours? And if they are happy with the results of their experience, they are deluded and wrong. That sounds religious.

So because of your experience, you are certain of the limits of the universe, and everyone else. That is the beauty of record breakers like Roger Bannister. When others, even the masses, are certain of limits and reality, they are continually proven wrong. It's not that a new thing has been created, as for example, once everyone believed the universe was clockwork and mechanical, or everyone believed that human minds and bodies were incapable of a 4 minute mile, its that the certain laws and viewpoints, and the certain limited actions resulting from them were not the be all and end all. You are now saying that you know for certain the laws and actions that are the final word, and that you even know for certain the laws of the universe, applicable to all.

[ZHereford]

Originally Posted by Uplift

So because of your experience, you are certain of the limits of the universe, and everyone else. That is the beauty of record breakers like Roger Bannister. When others, even the masses, are certain of limits and reality, they are continually proven wrong.

By the time Roger Bannister did actually run the mile under 4 minutes, it was evident that someone would do it. It was not that much of a stretch by that time. Humans have gotten progressively bigger, faster, stronger, so again, by the time Bannister accomplished this feat, it wasn't as big of a leap as you're making it sound. Training methods and nutrition have made many athletic accomplishments possible that were considered unheard of in the old days.

[Uplift]

Originally Posted by ZHereford

By the time Roger Bannister did actually run the mile under 4 minutes, it was evident that someone would do it. It was not that much of a stretch by that time. Humans have gotten progressively bigger, faster, stronger, so again, by the time Bannister accomplished this feat, it wasn't as big of a leap as you're making it sound. Training methods and nutrition have made many athletic accomplishments possible that were considered unheard of in the old days.

And before that? I made that point earlier. Its always the case. Before computers, it was considered ludicrous, as was flight, telephones, cars and so on. Once it is achieved, or the possibilities are realised, it is suddenly no big deal. Everyone forgets that it was once 'impossible'. Bannister didn't evolve a new type of body or brain. Neither did the other discoverers. Their thinking evolved. And yet you are certain in the field of LoA that it has reached a point of maximum evolution. You assert that the limits are certain, known. I disagree and see tons of exciting evidence of evolution in thinking. I look forward to it and learning from it.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Shamou

and right now I am seeing the same thing with people being put to sleep and evading reality with the garbage surrounding LoA… instead of taking the situation in their hands and actually doing something about it… .

Shamou, sorry but I think you exaggerate. If a person just sits around and IMs all day long without doing a thing, theoretically there are two possible consequences:

(a) he achieves results through LOA; or
(b) he achieves zero results.

If (a) happens, well, that's excellent. If (b) happens, well, after some time, the person will just either conclude:

(1) "Hey, LOA doesn't work. It's nonsense. I'm getting back to conventional living."; or

(2) "Hey, maybe I need to take personal action too. I'll start trying that now."

If (1), well, most people on Planet Earth live conventionally anyway. No big deal. If (2), well, you would be pleased with this outcome, wouldn't you.

So I think you fret unnecessarily.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Uplift

You assert that the limits are certain, known. I disagree and see tons of exciting evidence of evolution in thinking. I look forward to it and learning from it.

Look out for Dean Radin's upcoming triple-blind attempt to replicate and test Masaru Emoto's theory about thoughts affecting the molecular structure of water.

Dean Radin's double-blind attempt in 2006 has already been published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, and yes, the results are quite clear - the effect of prayer (focused on water) altered the molecular structure of the water, observable in the crystals formed from the water.

Ahhhhhh, science is primitive. People are using LOA to heal their illnesses, earn big bucks, mend broken relationships, achieve career success, find parking lots .....

and science is concerned about the shape of little ice crystals.

[Mark Lapierre]

Originally Posted by Uplift

So if someone experiences something different to you, their experience is less valid than yours? And if they are happy with the results of their experience, they are deluded and wrong. That sounds religious.

Do you remember when I misinterpreted something you said because of the way you structured your sentence? Perhaps the same thing is happening here. None of what I said was intended to imply someone else's experiences are less valid, deluded or wrong, in and of themselves.

Originally Posted by Uplift

So because of your experience, you are certain of the limits of the universe, and everyone else. That is the beauty of record breakers like Roger Bannister. When others, even the masses, are certain of limits and reality, they are continually proven wrong. It's not that a new thing has been created, as for example, once everyone believed the universe was clockwork and mechanical, or everyone believed that human minds and bodies were incapable of a 4 minute mile, its that the certain laws and viewpoints, and the certain limited actions resulting from them were not the be all and end all. You are now saying that you know for certain the laws and actions that are the final word, and that you even know for certain the laws of the universe, applicable to all.

If you read some of my other posts here or on my blog you'll see that I embrace uncertainty. I can see that I was wrong to use the word "certain" when I said "Our universe operates within certain limits", since in that context the meaning was ambiguous. I meant "definite but unspecified". None of what I said implied finality in my understanding of the laws of the universe.

I am 100% certain that if I slam my hand hard onto this keyboard, the keyboard will break and my hand will be sore. With training I could minimise or even completely eliminate the pain. I also believe that it might be possible, through plenty of different ways, to also avoid breaking the keyboard, though none of them involve simply believing that my hand will pass through it.

The point is that it wasn't simply thinking that allows Bannister and others to break records. It's thinking and action. Action that's different to the way they and others have acted before. That's one of the misinterpretations of the LoA, that all it requires is thought.

[Uplift]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

Look out for Dean Radin's upcoming triple-blind attempt to replicate and test Masaru Emoto's theory about thoughts affecting the molecular structure of water.

Dean Radin's double-blind attempt in 2006 has already been published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, and yes, the results are quite clear - the effect of prayer (focused on water) altered the molecular structure of the water, observable in the crystals formed from the water.

Ahhhhhh, science is primitive. People are using LOA to heal their illnesses, earn big bucks, mend broken relationships, achieve career success, find parking lots .....

and science is concerned about the shape of little ice crystals.

Yeh, thats classic.

It makes me wonder about the possibilities, considering our bodies and brains consist of mostly water. And then, what does it all boil down to?

[Max Power]

People only want to believe in something on a level that makes them comfortable. How much action is required for you to achieve your goals???...............exactly the amount you expect it will take.

Everything we believe to be true is true. It doesn't take a huge effort to change a belief, fundamental beliefs are the ones we're most comfortable with even if they are screwing up our lives.

LoA, IM and CM are all belief systems, we choose them as the methods to achieve our goals, but on a deeper level, they are actually our daily lives in action. Every thought has power, so every thought is creation. You can't turn your thoughts off and you can't turn LoA off, some people think it has an on/off switch, but if we're honest with oursleves we can see it's working 24/7

The level of comfort and responsibility we choose dictates our success in manifesting our lives.

Max

[ZHereford]

Originally Posted by Uplift

And yet you are certain in the field of LoA that it has reached a point of maximum evolution. You assert that the limits are certain, known. I disagree and see tons of exciting evidence of evolution in thinking. I look forward to it and learning from it.

No, I am not certain of anything. I'm just stating that we are limited at this point in our evolution in our ability to know/observe some things - how LOA works exactly being one of them.

[Uplift]

Originally Posted by Mark Lapierre

If you read some of my other posts here or on my blog you'll see that I embrace uncertainty. I can see that I was wrong to use the word "certain" when I said "Our universe operates within certain limits", since in that context the meaning was ambiguous. I meant "definite but unspecified". None of what I said implied finality in my understanding of the laws of the universe.

The point is that it wasn't simply thinking that allows Bannister and others to break records. It's thinking and action. Action that's different to the way they and others have acted before. That's one of the misinterpretations of the LoA, that all it requires is thought.

'Definite but unspecified'. I've gotta leave that alone.

So the thinking that changed the water? How far can that be taken? Whats the difference between water and anything else when its all reduced down. What was it, or is it, action or thought that results in the formation of whatever it is that makes anything possible? We'll only find out if we are open to learn and explore. I admire those that do, and see awesome benefits in what some are suggesting. We've talked about our different experiences before. My experience leads me to see that thought alone is unbelievably amasing. That what I once considered ludicrous or impossible isn't. But I also found out I have a lot of conditioning and stubborness and doubt, a lot to change and learn. So far the changes I have been able to make have been rewarding, or I wouldn't bother. And there is a lot to learn. But that's just me. Some people are just LoA, or whatever you want to call it naturals. They are out there. Bring them on, encourage them, I want to see more of the awesomeness of what they can do, what they can show us. And sure, not everyone is honest. We have to use our intelligence and discrimination in evaluating things, but not a closed mind. Not everyone is a con man either.

[Shamou]

Originally Posted by Uplift

Why feel the need to have everyone conform to your beliefs, limits and ideals. Roger Bannister failed in many attempts at the four minute mile and was publicly ridiculed. It was known beyond doubt at that time that a four minute mile was absolutely, certainly, utterly scientifically and medically impossible. A fact that frenzied experts were sure of and promoted relentlessly. Totally beyond the limits of humanity. The fairy tales of a fanatical, delusional, argumentative, stubborn, dangerous man. It had never, and could never be done, ever. 'An exercise in futility'. A poor lost soul, 'wasting his life'. Bannister was shattered and disallusioned when he failed and broke down in competition, in front of the world, much to the joy of his detracters. He almost gave up his attempts, after a difficult period. His sanity was in question and he was mocked openly by the 'certain experts'. We all now know what happened. Now that heaps of people do it, it's like, so, that was just a four minute mile, whats the big deal, we are talking about something that's really, truly impossible, that's really, truly beyond humanity. Its easy to sit in the stands booing and jeering. Plenty of experts on what can't be done. That's what seperates the Bannisters. They have no time for that. Too busy achieving the 'impossible'.

This post is total fabrication... see here for the Roger Bannister's four minute mile story...
.

[Shamou]

Originally Posted by Uplift

Why feel the need to have everyone conform to your beliefs, limits and ideals. Roger Bannister failed in many attempts at the four minute mile and was publicly ridiculed. It was known beyond doubt at that time that a four minute mile was absolutely, certainly, utterly scientifically and medically impossible. A fact that frenzied experts were sure of and promoted relentlessly. Totally beyond the limits of humanity. The fairy tales of a fanatical, delusional, argumentative, stubborn, dangerous man. It had never, and could never be done, ever. 'An exercise in futility'. A poor lost soul, 'wasting his life'. Bannister was shattered and disallusioned when he failed and broke down in competition, in front of the world, much to the joy of his detracters. He almost gave up his attempts, after a difficult period. His sanity was in question and he was mocked openly by the 'certain experts'. We all now know what happened. Now that heaps of people do it, it's like, so, that was just a four minute mile, whats the big deal, we are talking about something that's really, truly impossible, that's really, truly beyond humanity. Its easy to sit in the stands booing and jeering. Plenty of experts on what can't be done. That's what seperates the Bannisters. They have no time for that. Too busy achieving the 'impossible'.

This post is total fabrication... see here for the Roger Bannister's four minute mile story...
.

[ZHereford]