Garbage, all of it.

[cylon]

Again Angela speaks for me. That's how I feel about it. I dove into science, it's not like I'm going to reject that. But I think it's a partial explanation for the world around us. In my reality I include both, and that's just how it is.

Originally Posted by Angela

I'm okay with the idea that if you jump off the Empire State Building naked, you will probably be dead when you hit the sidewalk.

What if it's just my underwear?

[Angela]

Originally Posted by cylon

What if it's just my underwear?

That's a great example. What if your underwear was manufactured to include a parachute? What if a material is invented that displaces air and slows descent? What if your underpants catch on something on the way down (well, I guess they'd have to be pretty durable, wouldn't they)? what if you're in a harness? What if someone pulls you back just in time, after you jump? (actually that happened to me when Steve Martin pushed me into a ditch. I was wearing more than underwear that day, incidentally.)

[Acting Like Godot]

Shall I do everyone a big favour and propose a very neat summary?

1. For practical purposes, it is unnecessary to form any opinion about the deep underpinnings of what the LOA exactly is. In other words, you need not have an opinion:

(a) whether non-physical entities exist;
(b) whether EVERYTHING in the universe is formed by your thoughts;
(c) whether the starving African child also attracted her own circumstances;
(d) whether God exists;
(e) whether psychic powers or levitation really exist. Etc etc.

As a matter of fact, having an opinion about any of the above matters does not in itself help to improve your life in any concrete way.

2. For practical purposes, all you need to do is think positively, hold positive emotions, visualise and do a few quirky little tricks like going to alpha to meditate on your goals & intentions.

3. Then all sorts of events and circumstances WILL occur to help make those goals and intentions come true.

4. Some of these events and circumstances will be quite mundane (eg a little coincidence here, a little coincidence there, or something evidently the result of your own effort). Some of these events and circumstances will be quite bizarre (eg a REALLY striking coincidence here, and a VERY bizarre coincidence there, or something clearly very difficult to explain in conventional terms).

Either way, the point is - those events & circumstances will occur. And your goals and intentions will come true. 383 examples, from a great number of different people, available here.

5. Again it is unnecessary to label and classify those events & circumstances. You may call them:

"coincidence"
"reticular activating cortex"
"God"
"quantum physics"
"my cognitive bias in seeing a pattern that isn't really there"
"mind-body connection"
"synchronicity"
"magick"
"positive thinking"
"Law of Attraction"
"superstitition"
"my good luck"
"an event for which a scientific, down-to-earth explanation must surely exist, but hasn't been found yet"

Whatever you please. The labels are unimportant (except to John Freestone, who has a powerful tendency to miss the forest for the trees. Or the trees for the wood. Or wood for the carbon, hydrogen and oxygen molecules. Whatever).

The point is, whatever you wish to label or describe call these events and circumstances, they will occur - as long as you think positively, hold positive emotions, visualise, go to alpha etc. And that's all that really matters, for practical purposes.

6. Since you already have all the necessary equipment to try this out for yourself, it is unnecessary to take John Freestone's or ALG's word for it. Simply try it out for yourself. It costs you nothing to try, except perhaps 15 minutes a day. Anyway, reading John Freestone's or ALG's average post will take you just as long.

7. It is not necessary to attend any seminars or buy any books or DVDs. (You could just borrow two or three books from the library - that would get you off to a very good start).

8. It is unnecessary for you to do anything which may conventionally be regarded as risky, foolish or dangerous (for example, jumping off a tall building to see if you can fly; or putting your life savings into lottery tickets).

All you need to do is systematically arrange your thoughts in a positive way for 15 minutes a day, every day, and just carry on with life as normal. The 15-minute daily exercise will be more than sufficient to bring a stream of steady positive results in your life.

9. Remember - it works like a tennis serve or a golf swing. You don't get it right all the time - but you do get better and better, with practice!

---------

Remember, there is only so much that yakking on an Internet forum can do for you.

Two years ago, when I first joined this forum and had not started using LOA yet, I was earning $8,000 a month. This month, I earn $18,500. Starting next month, I'll be earing $23,000 per month. (And those of you who have been around here know that I'm quite happy to post documentary evidence.).

$8,000 to $23,000 is almost tripling my monthly salary, in the space of two years. How did I do it? Plenty of LOA/IM. You can do it too - and it's not just money, it could be your health, hobbies, family, home, work, relationships, community work, whatever. Anything in your reality.

Bear in mind - I gain nothing, telling you this. I'm not selling you any LOA seminars or books. You already have all the equipment you need - it's all in your head.

(P.S Technically, the last sentence above is untrue, because Dr Peter Fenwick has done research indicating that consciousness can operate independently of the physical brain and is not localised in the body. This point will severely upset John Freestone, who believes in the mind-body connection but would really prefer that the mind stick strictly to the body and not go off on its own jaunts around the rest of reality. But let's not get too pedantic).

[Wax Frog]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

9. Remember - it works like a tennis serve or a golf swing. You don't get it right all the time - but you do get better and better, with practice!

I read an article about a traditional cabinetmaker last night. He was quoted as saying, "the only way to get really good at something is to do it all day, every day for a very long time." I got the sense when I read it that I was getting a "message", crazy as it seemed. Not to practice formal IM techniques 24/7, certainly, but rather that I should be patient, and focus on cultivating a persistent, steady, IM-friendly attitude. Trust the process.

I actually felt moved to post this, but then forgot all about it later on. The above brought it back to mind, full force, like a confirmation.

[John Freestone]

Originally Posted by Angela

Cylon, you may be right... John is a part of me. He is definitely here to be my mirror buddy; it's just still hard for me to see my reflection clearly. (again, sorry for talking about you in front of your back, John.)

Hey, how about if we try posting from the opposite perspective, John? You be me and I'll be you, and see what comes up for us? I would love to try you on for size.

Hey, Sugarbabe, you sweet on me? First it's why don't you come over and watch me eat chocolate sometime, and now, well...

xxxJ

P.S. I've been wondering how to answer your repeated question about why I come here and criticise the LoA. Get back to yer sometime. Thinking of saying I do it for the same reason you do LoA, cause it's fun, but that would be a bit too trivial.

I don't mind you talking about me at all, BTW.

[cylon]

ALG I think you really nailed it. At the end of the day, what we're talking about here doesn't really matter or have an effect on my every day life. I'm noticing that as I make a commitment to my own happiness, I find that I tend to lose interest in anything that is not in alignment with that.

I'd rather just be focused on the things I love and that bring me joy. That 15 minutes in addition to checking in with how I'm feeling throughout the day to know if I'm on the right track.

I have enough faith in myself that I can develop this mindset and still not jump off a building or bathe in hot lava.

Me debating with someone for the sake of debate, the thrill just wears off after awhile.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by John Freestone

Hey, Sugarbabe, you sweet on me? First it's why don't you come over and watch me eat chocolate sometime, and now, well...

I was wondering when the heck you would catch on.

P.S. I've been wondering how to answer your repeated question about why I come here and criticise the LoA. Get back to yer sometime. Thinking of saying I do it for the same reason you do LoA, cause it's fun, but that would be a bit too trivial.

I hope you don't think I was being trivial when I said that. I think fun is why we're here (in the big sense, I mean ). The fun of relating, connecting, and communicating is my favorite fun of all. Not trivial. But I totally get your point -- why is this particular fun, fun? I guess it's easier for me to *get* the fun ALG might have in unfolding his views to you than it is for me to *get* the fun in the protesting that you do. To me, the protesting feels like it would be more stressful, although I won't presume that it's that way for you. Is it? Earlier when I was remembering my p.i.g. protests, I could remember that there was stress in what I was saying. And since you are an aspect of me now (especially since you brought chocolate), I recognized that I wasn't really asking my 'why' question of some hot guy named John, but rather, of myself. It's a mystery. I have a feeling there's something valuable in it. So, thanks for your thoughtful response.

Love,
Your Mirror Buddy

[newmark]

Acting Like Godot; could you explain what you mean by "going to alpha to meditate"
How do you do this?

[Daffy Duck]

Thanks for the summary, ALG. You explained it very well.

I'm a very practical person myself. And as you and I both have noted, you don't have to live a life of spiritual faith in LoA or God or "we're all one" or pink unicorns to live a successful life. What matters (practically) is thinking positive, visualizing success, etc.

I also tripled my income this year, but ummm... not quite as impressive as your numbers. But hey I'm a young guy in school. Nice job.

Debates can get old pretty quickly to me too, Cylon.

Thanks for the interesting discussion all. You guys have said so much that I don't really have much new to add. Goodbye everyone!

[John Freestone]

1. For practical purposes, it is unnecessary to form any opinion about the deep underpinnings of what the LOA exactly is. In other words, you need not have an opinion:

I'm happy for you, ALG, to have your own take on these issues. I strongly disagree with most of what you write here, and urge people to have opinions...their own opinions.

I wouldn't advise anyone just try "going into alpha", let alone manifest their desires or expect good things to happen to them as a result. For a start, meditation teachers usually advise people to check with a doctor before starting. Secondly...well, it's a big secondly...but there are potential pitfalls in the manifestation practices. Things are not always what they seem. The mind is a little trickster. Getting free of prejudice is a wonderful opportunity, but I don't think it comes to those who stop having opinions.

I think that much of the LoA/IM philosophy is going in the opposite direction. Usually unwittingly, the practitioner seeks to increase his prejudice. It is fitting that a self-styled expert should summarise the theory with so much emphasis on the worthlessness of our opinions about it (while sharing his with such self-confidence).

Daffy Duck expressed it this way: "The interesting thing about LoA is its self-defensive belief. It removes itself from the burden of proof." I agree. It is for people to choose themselves whether they see any value in reality-checking their ideas, or whether they will separate themselves from such burdens as proof or logic and enter the world of makebelieve, or indeed whether they see it completely differently from either of our positions.

I have never argued a radically intellectual philosophy, and see a great deal of usefulness in balance. It is good to suspend judgement and thought, I just think that ALG is offering a very one-sided approach: don't think, just follow my instructions and try it out for yourself. That might seem innocent to some people - after all, if you don't like it you can stop again.

But can you? What if deciding not to test anything anymore is seductive, even addictive? It wouldn't be too far fetched. If practice requires you to not test things rationally, but just believe and trust, that might become habitual to some extent and interfere with your assessment of whether you feel you should give it up again. If not a one-way trapdoor, it seems, potentially, like a slippery slope.

[newmark]

John Freestone; thanks for the concern, but I think it is unnecessary . Whenever I approach a new subject or set of ideas which I'm interested in learning more about, I just happily believe and accept all and try to make it my own.
Otherwise I would never really understand the subject or ideas deeply.
Once I have absorbed the ideas and they are part of me, then it is very easy for me to turn on the critical part of mind. I have no problem with this.
ALG; I've searched and found the information I needed.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by John Freestone

But can you? What if deciding not to test anything anymore is seductive, even addictive?

Exactly, John. You have just described your own problem.

Me, I am testing my intentions all the time. At least 2 or 3 per week.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by John Freestone

It is fitting that a self-styled expert should summarise the theory with so much emphasis on the worthlessness of our opinions about it (while sharing his with such self-confidence).

Hardly, John.

I have said that it is unnecessary to have an opinion about the underpinnings of LOA, to have it work.

In the same way, it is unnecessary to have a degree in mechanical engineering, before knowing how to drive. The degree would be helpful in understanding how a car really works - on the other hand, most of the drivers in the world are not mechanical engineers.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by John Freestone

It is for people to choose themselves whether they see any value in reality-checking their ideas,

I do use various reality-checking systems, John.

One of them is the credit balance in my bank account. It has grown enormously since I began to use the LOA. I'm quite convinced that this is not an illusion.

There are many simple ways to check reality, John. For example, some people use LOA to help them lose weight. I reckon that a weighing scale would be a reasonably reliable reality-check in this case.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by John Freestone

I have never argued a radically intellectual philosophy, and see a great deal of usefulness in balance.

So do I, John. That is why I recommend just doing 15 minutes of IM a day; and then just carrying with life as usual.

15 minutes a day is quite negligible, I should think. It's far less than the amount of time needed to read all your posts on this forum today.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by John Freestone

Usually unwittingly, the practitioner seeks to increase his prejudice.

Yes, positive thinking may be seen as prejudiced, by negative people who think that they're realistic.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by John Freestone

I have never argued a radically intellectual philosophy

Indeed, you have neither been intellectual nor radical, and actually you have no philosophy either.

Essentially, all your many posts on this forum may be summarised as follows:

"If a thing has two possible explanations, we should neither believe the thing nor either of its two explanations."

and

"If a thing has only one explanation and I don't like it, the explanation must be wrong. Certainly rational scientists will one day come up with an explanation that I like, and if I like it, it shall be true."

and

"If a thing cannot be explained, then I shall just ignore it."

and

"If I cannot understand it, I must not try it, and I must advise everyone not to try it, otherwise we shall all descend on a slippery slope to hell, insanity and madness."

A little tongue-in-cheek of me, perhaps, but if you go through your own posts, you'll see that one of the above four positions will be reflected in approximately 95% of your posts.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by John Freestone

I just think that ALG is offering a very one-sided approach: don't think, just follow my instructions and try it out for yourself.

Nonsense. I certainly did not recommend not thinking. Thinking is quite essential for LOA/IM.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by John Freestone

I wouldn't advise anyone just try "going into alpha", let alone manifest their desires or expect good things to happen to them as a result. For a start, meditation teachers usually advise people to check with a doctor before starting.

Oh, very well, if you insist. Before you use the LOA, please ask your doctor whether it will be harmful to your health, to lie down for 15 minutes each day; breathe deeply and slowly, and relax.

[Frans]

Wow, all these consecutive postings...
What's happening, ALG?

Maybe you should ask yourself now: did John Freestone hurt my real self or my ego?

[Acting Like Godot]

Nah. I notice he loves to give long replies to short posts, therefore I decided to write several short posts. Then John can spend a few hours replying.

Seriously, I cannot spend too much time here any more. The publisher I manifested last month has been chasing me to tidy up my manuscript and all sorts of other book-related things.

Plus I start on my new job on Monday (this is the one I manifested in February - the opportunity came one day later. However I only accepted the offer in May).

AND I am manifesting to win a national blog award next month. My current affairs blog has been shortlisted already.

AND I need to manifest a place for my son in one of the nation's top schools. Registration will be in July. (The education system in my country is unfortunately very competitive).

AND there's a 10km run coming up in eight weeks, which really must be a good opportunity for me to experiment with those exercise-related sorts of self-hypnosis.

AND ... And ... And .... I'm so busy thinking.

(By the way, if by any chance you're interested in poetry, send me a PM with your email address. I'll send you my manuscript).

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

(P.S Technically, the last sentence above is untrue, because Dr Peter Fenwick has done research indicating that consciousness can operate independently of the physical brain and is not localised in the body. This point will severely upset John Freestone, who believes in the mind-body connection but would really prefer that the mind stick strictly to the body and not go off on its own jaunts around the rest of reality. But let's not get too pedantic).

Oh, a Peter Fenwick link for you guys.

Dr. Peter Fenwick, M.D.: Science and Spirituality

To understand my point about consciousness operating independently of the physical brain, click on the link and go to pages 4 and 5, focusing on parts like these:

The flat electroencephalogram (EEG), indicating no brain activity during cardiac arrest, and the high incidence of brain damage afterwards both point to the conclusion that the unconsciousness in cardiac arrest is total. You cannot argue that there are ‘‘bits’’ of the brain that are functioning; there are not. There is a confusional onset and offset, and there is no brain-based memory functioning. Everything that constructs our world for us is, in fact, ‘‘down.’’ There is no possibility of the brain creating any images. Memory is not functioning during this time, so it should be impossible to have clearly structured and lucid experiences, and because of brain damage, memory should be significantly impaired, and you should not be able to remember any experiences which occurred during that time. Now, that raises interesting and difficult questions for us, because the NDErs say that their experiences occur during unconsciousness, and science maintains that this is not possible.

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by John Freestone

There's a difference between saying "I tend to see what I want to see" and "My beliefs change reality".

There's also a state of knowing that is missed. When we are totally accepting of what is, we can know that "what is" is a pure reflection of our inner being.

There will be no filtering of "I see what I want to" and there will be no "beliefs morphing the world". There will be a oneness that is felt throughout your experience of being.

You won't have to be sure to believe a certain thing. You don't have needs to change what is, yet you know that your being is "what is".

And you won't be stuck in conditioned ways of looking at the 3d world coming from only a sense of a separate self.

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by moonrambler

I have problems with all the same things you mention here about inconsistency in results, and then wondering how much really is pure coincidence.

With the example you give about the mice, what's missing is something that is really very weird, weird enough that other people are a bit freaked by it and don't just pass it off as coincidence. Now first, I would never do this with mice, because I would wind up with a house full of mice , but if I did, I'm pretty sure what I would get is an ad for a computer mouse, because that seems to be the way this tends to work for me. It always seems like I'm getting a result that is humorous. At least it's humorous to the universe, it isn't always humorous to me.

We forget how bizarre "ordinary" stuff is. It is possible to see the world in a way that puts you in such a state of awe that everything is wondrous to the point that "things" look like temporary mirages and there's a glow of some kind on everything and everything feels exactly "right" and correctly placed.

Everything that we have become accustomed to, is also very extremely miraculous. We have taken the 3d world for granted. We don't have to try to find and look for synchronicities that "prove" something. Or coincidences that are so bizarre that it just has to mean something.

What we do need to do is reclaim our sense of wonder and awe and drop into being and nowness. Reconnect with nature and play in/with nature.

The world is exactly as it is and if we look with a unconditioned mind we will know we are also the world and that everything has a connection.

[cylon]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

Oh, very well, if you insist. Before you use the LOA, please ask your doctor whether it will be harmful to your health, to lie down for 15 minutes each day; breathe deeply and slowly, and relax.

Lol. Most doctors emphasize doing things to cut down on stress.

However meditation can bring up a lot of things that were buried beneath the surface, so that purging can be uncomfortable, but it's necessary.

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by John Freestone

I think it's exactly that: we all have a strong tendency to invent significance in random events. Getting excited about LoA just makes you more susceptible to the disease.

I think we have a strong tendency to look for meaning in life. Which is because we don't feel whole. Making random events have significance is an attempt to feel whole. The thing is we don't have to pin significance on random events. There is an order to the universe's meanderings even if random, the whole ball of reality is whole and we forget that.

Furthermore, when you are obessessing about the mystical meanings of everything, you miss the psychological and realistic meanings. You invented the description 'stinking' to describe thoughts about your friend after finding the fish, I think, and if you analysed the situation you might have recognised that you were having perfectly acceptable, but negative, feelings about a relationship, and you might have concluded that you needed to exercise loving assertive behaviour. Instead, it seems, you felt guilty for feeling irritated sometimes with a friend, saw a fish, and made up a complete fantasy connection between the two, labelling your thoughts 'stinking'. I don't want to offend you, but most doctors would describe this - and most of the 'connections' manufacured and reported here on this site - as insane. Sorry if that offends you, but their text books describe these thinking styles and relate them to all sorts of other problems. It might not be a problem, but it can be. In some classic cases of psychosis the term 'over-inclusivity' is used to describe this thinking style where every event is interpreted as significant (adding to the patient's delusive beliefs - you know the kind of thing, the CIA are trying to kill them, they're Jesus Christ, etc.).

Interesting. Often when people become "enlightened", if they aren't also grounded some how, are shuffled off to the looney bin and given drugs and sedatives - instead of taken out into nature and allowed to connect, feel whole, be natural/unconditioned and given a chance to "come down" and get grounded - that is to also know they are an individual at the same time as having the "over-inclusivity" thinking that opened their ability to feel that there is oneness and a connection to everything that we forgot about.

The problem is actually the other way round - in ordinary human life there is so much data pouring in all the time that if we set up a kind of search filter by thinking 'mouse' or whatever, the chances are we'll spot a mouse. This kind of thing has been demonstrated endlessly and, as I said before, is ironically part of the LoA philosophy, but after that it comes to false conclusions, IMO. What's happening is that you're seeing mice all the damn time (relatively speaking, if you took note of everything over a long enough period), you just haven't a clue, because if we noticed everything that came to our minds we'd go nuts.

Hence no need to look for particular weird synchronicities. It's our filters on life that make us view the world as to our liking but that is a conditioned mind, mostly. If we could have such a flexible view of the world, without any specific filter - we would actually see the world in the moment to the point that there will be a knowing. That knowing is a feeling. Some call it conversion, if going the religious route. Or seeing the light, etc... In that state of mind, everything is exactly as it is and there is no mind objections going on and there is profound peace and meaning. The 3d world will look dreamy. Everything will be symbolic more than static objects "out there". Anything can have deeper meaning and it's our ability to decide what we want it to mean that is part of it. Like a dream that can be interpreted for how we are feeling or achieving or progressing or wanting or failing - so too the 3d world can be for us.

But once you start collecting so-called 'evidence', you notice those random features of your experience that fit. Look what's happening here - I mentioned seeing a mouse on tv, and you're talking about hippos on tv. I just wrote "nuts" (and "insane") and someone mentioned squirrels earlier. Are these significant synchronicities? Psychology and mathematics tells us it is highly unlikely.

They are connections, yes. That is part of what we do. Look for associations. That is part of the holographic mind. Getting things to fit into the big oneness hologram requires making associations that can make sense of the too much data that we get in 3d. That is the friction between individuality and oneness.

Did the hippos mean anything? Nope. Did you just waste a load of your life wondering what the message was, what the fish meant, and what to think about in the car in order to win the lottery? Yep.

When viewing 3d as symbolic, you can have spiritual sight. There won't be much need to figure out the "message" but rather feel that all is right with the world. That's what one is looking for to find meaning. The message is that there isn't really anything "wrong". There's no need to fear the world. I'm not sure how much the messages of a symbolic view of the 3d world is like external guidance that you can base deciding on. But rather the reflection of what you are trying to decide or have already decided. Which then could be our filters on reality again anyway. But if we view without filtering, with unconditioned minds, the 3d world will be full of things that tempt us into wanting to think there's grand messages and something explainable. When really the only message can be - all is right with the world, no need to fear. Which, if one takes that message to heart - one can view with a less conditioned mind. Then everything will feel right. lol - what the heck am I saying?

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by cylon

Even more trippy, what if EVERYTHING is a synchronicity? If you are creating your reality, are attracting everything in your life, then there is nothing that happens that in some way is not a result of your thoughts, present or past.

That's a tough one to digest.

I have been reading through these posts and replying. I posted something like this before reading this particular post.

This is what was called 'over-inclusivity' and leads to insanity. Which is true if it goes the route of delusions of grandeur instead of becoming reverent and humble and keeping one's grounding.

We ARE our reality. Do we create what we ARE?

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by John Freestone

LoA is real yeah and its really cool yeah and I can't get it to work (much/at all/the way it's supposed to) what am I doing wrong?

so true.

People want LoA to fix their issues. Their issues are what make them want to "use" LoA. This not where LoA works. It doesn't work from a personality that is all addicted and needy and full of baggage. Well what doesn't work is that this personality is not able to focus on anything but their issues. I think once one is more baggage free (not operating from a conditioned mind) they don't feel the need to "use" LoA. They may end up playing with attracting things, but it's not having that neediness that started wanting LoA to fix their issues.

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by John Freestone

Constantly the claim of psychics whose experiments don't show a positive result is that 'it' (the effect, their power) doesn't perform on cue. It's not a performing monkey, but a spiritual thing to be respected. Ok. So what this means is that even if it is a real effect, it is virtually useless. It is so unpredictable (literally) that it can't be measured. Yet the psychic is giving the impression that this is a really important thing.

We get in our own way. It is useless because of the same mechanisms of our brain filtering. The not performing on cue is out of it being a skill that has levels. That's what they'd say. It is predictable as much as a pianist or dancer can pull off a good performance.

I could choose any number of arbitrary cosmologies that can't be proven and have no use. Like I kept saying to ALG, if I'm just a figment of your imagination, what's the point in talking to me, and why send me off to read bad research? We have to choose - reality or makebelieve. There's not much middle ground. And IM is literally makebelieve. Do you actually CARE whether there are ACTUAL fairies at the bottom of the garden? Because whether there are or are not is, IMHO, a question of what is real. Do you mind if you believe in them and they're not really there? Because that's fine too if you want to live like that, in a world of deliberate renunciation of rationality and reality-testing. Is there any belief you'd consider silly and misguided? Do you know that Santa Claus isn't real, or is that a matter of opinion, of imagination?

Provable or imagination. So reality is provable. And the reality that is provable is magical. Why does gravity work? Every equation that predicts the laws of physics still has grand mysteries behind it. Why is that the speed of light? I think the way to go is to be open and look at the mysteries and allow yourself to be in awe and love it. We can test reality and make equations that predict and also push the limit of what we think reality is. The we get into seeing that we are part of the equations more than Newton thought. Anyway, we get bored with regular reality but instead of re-realizing that regular reality is pretty darn wild we go into our imagination to entertain ourselves out of that boredom. However, a lot of the imagination going on is open minded views of what science is looking at paralleling what mystics and spiritual teachers have expressed.

[cylon]

Originally Posted by wolfgang

I have been reading through these posts and replying. I posted something like this before reading this particular post.

This is what was called 'over-inclusivity' and leads to insanity. Which is true if it goes the route of delusions of grandeur instead of becoming reverent and humble and keeping one's grounding.

We ARE our reality. Do we create what we ARE?

Reverent and humble to whom?