Garbage, all of it.

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by cylon

Reverent and humble to whom?

To Life.

Being revert to me means respect for life forms and being responsible for what you are doing, thinking.

Humble to your own ego.

[cylon]

Yeah but I am life. I may not be above anything else in life but I'm also not beneath.

Your point was that LOA could give you an over-inflated ego. If everything in our lives is a result of thought, then call it what you will.

[simonsta]

If anyone doesn't believe it then they are free not to do it. If you do believe it the same is true. Surely its up to the individual, right?

Saying its garbage is a bit strong - I think you could justifiably say you don't believe in it. Thats up to you!

[John Freestone]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

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.

How nice to see we're on first name terms now, Acting.

I don't believe you are as daft as you're making out, but, assuming you are, I'll explain that in most rational situations like scientific enquiry, a test is not the same as a measure. A scientific test, pretty much the same as the 'reality-testing' I referred to, tries to establish whether there is a corellation between measurements, which is used as a way to check our hypotheses concerning causal links between things. Does that make sense?

If you are still intent on pretending to be in any doubt, let me add by way of illustration that you might observe that global inflation has risen during the time you practised IM, as well as your bank balance, and draw a causal link between them, and that your income might have been a) due to something else entirely, or b) partially caused, or stimulated, by IM, but mediated by observable, measurable action in the world rather than 'magick'. Just measuring how well off you are and assuming that it is because you started practising IM is a wild, irrational assumption.

Ditto re slimming via IM - the scales don't lie, but the cause might just possibly have something to do with calorie intake and expenditure, so I hear.

But maybe I'm judging you as a liar when in fact you are actually stupid. You said earlier, "I plan to use LOA to manifest an extraordinary increase in my 1Q and not only get into Mensa, but be rather extraordinary even by Mensa standards. I think this will be quite an interesting experiment, and goodness, there will be an external tester, Mensa with specific methodology to quantify the result of my manifestation (it's called an IQ score)."

This passage suggests that perhaps you didn't just manufacture the other examples to try and throw readers off the scent, because here you demonstrate, apparently quite innocently, the same mistaken thinking, that Mensa's IQ test can demonstrate the causal agency of IM itself (as opposed to your IQ increasing due to study, practice of IQ tests, thinking about intelligence, the passage of time, watching TV, etc. in the meantime). Again this suggests that you don't (and didn't then) know the difference between an established causal relationship and a simple measurement with a prejudice attached. The fact that you typed '1Q' could also be taken as evidence of your genuineness, but then we can't be sure. I hadn't heard of 'magick' before.

Tentative Conclusions:
Despite your accusation that offered two different explanations of a phenomenon I can be sure to dismiss both, in this case I suspect that both are partial answers. I suppose it's possible, however, that you're honest and smart, and the results of my research so far only appear odd because I am stuck in reductionism, common sense and similar tired old principles, while your mind soars through the tiniest cosmic quantum gaps, as free as a pink unicorn.

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by cylon

Yeah but I am life. I may not be above anything else in life but I'm also not beneath.

Then you'd respect yourself as you are life.

Your point was that LOA could give you an over-inflated ego. If everything in our lives is a result of thought, then call it what you will.

I wasn't trying to make a point that using LoA makes you have a big ego. Sorry if I wrote unclearly about that idea.

I think people approach wanting to use LoA with their ego. Or it's their ego's feeling of lack that makes them want to "use" LoA. Or the sense of not feeling whole, which the ego is good at feeling, drives us to want to use these IM ideas because it looks like a solution to our issues of not having what we think we want. And those things we want to get by using LoA are just things or situations that we "think" we want. They are not our true desires, they are ego desires.

It's like telling someone that it's ok to eat what ever you want and they go eat ice cream all day. But wanting ice cream is not really what they want, if they could be more in tune with their true nature and listen to the body - they would realize wanting ice cream is not it. It would be more like what one really wants to eat is what feeds the body well or even helps heal the body.

The same with our desires. We "think" we need something. We try to solve an issue in our lives by looking for something that comes from feelings of lack. Those feelings of lack are from being in our ego separate self too much. Then we think, ok more $$ is the cure to lack and here's IM so if I do it right everything will be fixed.

However I don't toss LoA/IM out with the bathwater. It's an interesting idea and I feel it to be in operation just by seeing what's in my life and observing my inner state. It get what I put in. I haven't tried too much to prove it or send out specific desires. I do however spend some time meditating and then some of that is putting myself in feelings that I like to have - hoping that attracts more life situations that would allow me to be in those feelings more regularly. Sometimes it feels like a battle. As others have said. They start doing something like this and the ego patterns protest. Then I go back to just meditating and usually find peace at least. I try to find inspiration and excitement - but wonder how much of that is the ego wanting a rush anyway.

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by newmark

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

That is a specific brain wave state: alpha. I've also heard theta is a good for the IMing state. This is because asking or praying for something is done in a non-ordinary state of consciousness. That really, if one can be one with all and move that consciousness into a desire it manifests, because that consciousness is oneness where everything possible exists. so it's said.

I don't know how ALG does it. But most usually sit or lie down, with closed eyes and no distractions and relax the body with auto suggestion and focus on breathing. Like scan each body part and say something like, my feet are so relaxed and with each breath they relax more and more. Once the body is totally relaxed you are probably in alpha or deeper.

[wolfgang]

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.

So are you advising the opposite? Are you advising to not meditate at all? I would think you'd be into real benefits of relaxation. Surely there's science in that. Oh, that's right you do agree with the body mind connections...

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.

Perhaps this is the same thing I say about coming from the ego with our desires. We "think" we know what we want, what will make us happy. But maybe we have prejudice about that because it's our ego wanting more and more. We decide that getting so and so will make us happier or be cool to have or be a fun thing, when we don't really know that getting such and such will being happiness. We ignore the evidence that "things" or particular life situations may not be how to become whole again. It's our mind being a trickster.

For me, all this IMing is about getting to the root desire. Which is keeping me busy since really it's a wonderful life anyway. What else do I really want? I just go back to why do IM anyway? Or I start to fall back into bad habits and think, oh I need to use IM now. But that is falling into feeling lack about life and then thinking I know what will fix that.

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.

I see that too. Then also what about how many have worked on IMing at some level that just breeds more frustration and then more lack and then more feelings that make them want IM to work to try to get rid of that lack, again.

But then, what would happen if we sat down, became meditative, conjured up peace feelings by imagination? But didn't expect that particular imagination to occur in real life - that it's just a vehicle to find peaceful feelings and get that into the body? Now how would you test this? It would not have to be tested because while you are feeling peace you have it with you. You are generating peace by doing this. Is there any prejudice here? Is there some dangerous assumption going on that might create less peace?

Ah, but I'm not expecting anything other than more peace in my life. Which, I am actively putting into my body during the meditation anyway. But, maybe I would expect that state to spill into my day - because it does. Doing a meditation and generating peace as a focus also sets my habits in that direction and it will become my way of being normally more and more. Maybe this isn't IM. But this is part of what the IMers suggest to do as a method. Meditate and generate the feeling state of your intentions.

[cylon]

Originally Posted by wolfgang

For me, all this IMing is about getting to the root desire. Which is keeping me busy since really it's a wonderful life anyway. What else do I really want? I just go back to why do IM anyway? Or I start to fall back into bad habits and think, oh I need to use IM now. But that is falling into feeling lack about life and then thinking I know what will fix that.

wolfgang how do you know this is not how other people go about it?

These are huge issues. Ego vs Higher Self, Abundance mindset vs Scarcity Mindset.... and everyone has their own take based on their own individuality.

I don't think ego is where true desires come from. I believe that is your highest self... which wants love, abundance, creativity, all the big stuff. I know that's what I want.

Ego in my opinion actually gets in the WAY of IM. A big subject is money. IM says, you deserve just like everyone else deserves. For many people their ego says they DON'T deserve. So they may start IM or intending for abundance, and what happens? Their ego sabatoges it. It says "no, I am not worth having abundance. That's only for people who work hard. If I don't work hard, I don't deserve". Then your intention stops dead in it's track.

Ego tends to get in the way of manifesting your true desires. And ego would say "who little old me? Nah, I can't have that stuff. It's just me. Give up those dreams."

You talk about the natural state of flowing, and I think that's where this all comes from anyway. I think the practices of IM and visualizing, everything else, are little "tricks" designed to go AROUND your ego (who would make excuses why you couldn't have stuff) and eventually weaken it to the point that you are more or less in your natural, happy, abundant, in the moment state.... which is where things tend to flow.

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by cylon

wolfgang how do you know this is not how other people go about it?

hmm... I didn't try to cast this as everyone doing IM is doing it wrong but just stating how I've come to take it all in. I would think many are looking at it like it seems you and I are approaching it. And it is great to point out in case someone has not thought about the trickster ego mind too much.

These are huge issues. Ego vs Higher Self, Abundance mindset vs Scarcity Mindset.... and everyone has their own take based on their own individuality.

I don't think ego is where true desires come from. I believe that is your highest self... which wants love, abundance, creativity, all the big stuff. I know that's what I want.

Ego in my opinion actually gets in the WAY of IM. A big subject is money. IM says, you deserve just like everyone else deserves. For many people their ego says they DON'T deserve. So they may start IM or intending for abundance, and what happens? Their ego sabatoges it. It says "no, I am not worth having abundance. That's only for people who work hard. If I don't work hard, I don't deserve". Then your intention stops dead in it's track.

Good reiteration of those ideas. I would say that ego getting in the way of IM is not just your opinion but the crux of the matter as fact. Even without the woo-woo side to LoA, there is psychological basis for how habitual behavior, conditioned minds generate suffering.

This is why IM is interesting for me because it makes you take a look at your habits so as to be "unblocked". That is a good thing. Of coarse, I wonder, once I can be totally "unblocked" what's left to desire or "need"? The state of being unblocked is also a state of love, abundance, creativity... yes?

Ego tends to get in the way of manifesting your true desires.

You talk about the natural state of flowing, and I think that's where this all comes from anyway. I think the practices of IM and visualizing, everything else, are little "tricks" designed to go AROUND your ego (who would make excuses why you couldn't have stuff) and eventually weaken it to the point that you are more or less in your natural, happy, abundant, in the moment state.... which is where things tend to flow.

So then once in flow, we don't feel lack or the "need". And we have made a flip into a different way of being, really. Less ego and more feeling whole.

[cylon]

Originally Posted by wolfgang

So then once in flow, we don't feel lack or the "need". And we have made a flip into a different way of being, really. Less ego and more feeling whole.

Right. And the IM side effect is that you really don't feel in need, because you have stopped resisting the abundance of the universe. You are in allowing mode 24/7, and all the things your highest self wants for you (what it KNOWS will add to your life) start coming to you, which they would have anyway if ego wasn't there saying "go away abundance, I'm not worthy!"

That's the whole basis of IM. Not lists and affirmations and visualizations etc. Those are important TOOLS to short-circuit the ego and get straight to being in the joyful allowing state. And from my experience, that state is when the universe starts re-organize itself to match your desires.

[newmark]

Wolfgang; thanks for the information. I realize now that I've been going into alpha for some time without knowing that that was the name for it.

[John Freestone]

Originally Posted by wolfgang

So are you advising the opposite? Are you advising to not meditate at all?

No, I've been teaching meditation (off and on) for about ten years and think meditation is one of the best things a person can do for their mental health. I must admit I was partly just snapping at ALG, but general advice in Britain and on most English websites I've seen talks about possible dangers and some specifically tell you to check with your GP if you've not done any before. It's partly because people can get a little carried away and do too much or, doing breathing meditations, can hyperventilate or overstimulate certain glands such as the pituitary. But a surprising number of people find that meditation, even done correctly, can cause them to get more stressed, upset, or anxious, and even to the point of having panic attacks.

I agree with cylon, "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." However, whether it's necessary is a matter of opinion, but I'd agree that it's usually therapeutic to uncover buried 'stuff', but some people don't want to and can function perfectly well with their stuff buried. Anyway, I would say that it being "uncomfortable" can, for some people, be a massive understatement. It can leave people in mental hospitals, uncovering stuff too quickly or without sufficient support and guidance. I just think when we're talking to the world about how to live well, it's worth mentioning such risks and suggesting that a medical check can be advisable. Probably more important, I'd say, is to take it VERY easy at first, understand clearly what it is you are aiming at (and there are many different meditations with different purposes and internal states), and if you feel strange, dizzy, anxious or anything else that is worrying you, stop and don't do any more that day. I emphasise that because new learners (again, particularly of breathing meditations) sometimes stop for a few minutes or hours if they begin to feel weird, and then want to do it again because it felt so wonderful and now they're coming down, thinking that's what the teacher meant by "stop for a bit". What's happening is they're getting off on it, and it can be dangerous.

But then, what would happen if we sat down, became meditative, conjured up peace feelings by imagination? But didn't expect that particular imagination to occur in real life - that it's just a vehicle to find peaceful feelings and get that into the body? Now how would you test this? It would not have to be tested because while you are feeling peace you have it with you. You are generating peace by doing this. Is there any prejudice here? Is there some dangerous assumption going on that might create less peace?

Good questions. I don't think there's a big problem here in practical terms. I mean, I agree that if you're creating peace in your meditation and you feel peace in your meditation, it would be strange to think of it as a prejudice. It's more what I'd call direct experience. I brought in the word prejudice in relation to the assumption of cause and effect when they're different phenomena - like intentions to get rich causing you to get rich. I suppose you're suggesting this - that creating peace in meditation could possibly lead to less peace at other times, and in that case, since these are different phenomena (one momentary experience, the other some quantified measure of overall peacefulness in ordinary life), it would need, IMHO, some research to establish the mathematical relationship. I'm fairly sure quite a bit has been done, and it generally finds very much in favour of peaceful meditations increasing overall peacefulness....not to mention a wide range of improvements in health, mental and physical, which is why I say it's one of the best things we can do for ourselves!

Of course, science isn't everything, and there's a lot of anecdotal evidence, mostly in favour. Sometimes I wonder, though. I recently had some dealings with Buddhist monks, whom you would expect to meditate regularly and know a lot about being peaceful, and I discovered that they squabble almost worse than ALG and I are probably about to do, and one in particular was as closed-minded and dismissive of anything that questioned 'the scriptures' as anyone could be. My partner's son went to South Korea recently, as well, and laughed about his visits to the temples run by 'money-grabbing Buddhists'. Religions get like that, I'm afraid. The teacher's message gets twisted and can go quite rotten.

I digress! I must say I like your view of IM/LOA and a lot of the things you say here, wolfgang. I'm pushed for time just now, but I've been reading about recent research called XXP (experimental existential psychology), and it reminds me of your view of people trying to fix things with IM. Existentialism involves the idea that we have a few, very powerful, very basic fears - especially of death, aloneness, meaninglessness and lack of freedom - and most religions, including LoA/IM/SR and even science ( ... .... ........ ) help us to control or avoid dealing with these fears. Our mythologies tell us we'll live forever, united with the One, in a universe that has divine purpose and responds to our personal desires and choices. What more could we wish for?! This is central to my concerns about IM and why I'm here arguing about it (hi, sweet cheeks angel mirror person ) - because it (I mean, certain interpretations of it) take this self-delusive potential of religion to a further level of abstraction: it can be deliberate delusion: I think therefore I create truth. It can deny the classical idea of separate, objective Truth, independent of imagination or will. I think that people who believe that at some point bang their heads against reality. Was it you said that about humility? They love acting like god, and they deny their own egos. It often hurts when they come down to earth. They thought they were cool for knowing that they're responsible for their health, and they know that they can create light and purity and love. The next minute they're full of rage because they're doing all their manifesting and somehow the cancer is still spreading, or it won't bring back their loved one who walked in front of a bus, and they hate everyone and everything with as much passion as they jealously hoarded for the good things in life. Bump. Ouch. Oh look, I'm a mortal human just like everyone else. (All this may be wrong, and I'll see you on the other side).

Personally, I (like you to some extent) find that the revelatory facility of meditation lies in being and not striving, not trying to create, not trying to intend, let alone manifest. You also stress creating peace, and if we're gonna create something, that's one of the best things, and I'm not against doing a bit of that myself. I do think, however (maybe this speaks to your earlier question too) that we can be too fixated on positive feelings, and that this can represent a fear of negative feelings, or the existential vacuum of no feelings at all. It's like cylon's idea of the stuff we keep down. Being peace-minded deliberately can be a defense against dealing with your ****. And life involves ****.

I try to practise passivity in my meditation, to sit with whatever is and just observe, just be in fact. What I find is that out of that naturally comes an incredibly deep joy and peace that surpasses any I could sit kindling with nice thoughts and beach imagery! It seems boundlessly creative, too, even on personal things - answers to worries, ideas I'm working on, poetry, music, whatever - as long as I am genuinely passive and, I think, grateful, humble about what might come to me. After all, everything that comes is a gift. I didn't ask to be born, I used to rant. Also, I didn't create anything. Everything in my life came to me, was given to me. It arrived. I had absolutely nothing to do with it. Probably.

Hey look, I kept it brief again! Must stop meditating.

[pianoperformer]

John,

I've been reading your posts from about page 13, and really agree with you. I like your idea of the physical processes that makes some things manifest, but not through magic or otherwise through paranormal or unnatural means.

I do wonder why some get so offended when their beliefs are questioned as they are in this thread. Healthy debate is good.

Subjective reality is an interesting belief. It is no more than that, though, but I see some defend it just as vehemently as fundamentalist Christians defend their religion.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

Subjective reality is an interesting belief. It is no more than that, though, but I see some defend it just as vehemently as fundamentalist Christians defend their religion.

I thought we were talking more about IM? Anyway, I just want to say that subjective reality is more of a perspective -- a useful lens to look through -- than a belief. I don't feel the need to defend it (and I certainly don't belief it's "who I am"), but it is fun to clarify what it actually is, for usefullness' sake (for my own sake). There are plenty of people who don't see the usefulness of this perspective, but at least here in a personal development forum, it's interesting to hone it by clarifying misconceptions or misperceptions.

I imagine the LoA avatars might be thinking in a similar way. When we talk about it (defend or explain or whatever), it's really to help ourselves see things more clearly and to grow.

[mercuryrising]

Originally Posted by John Freestone

If, for instance, I decide that I can predict the future, and I'm a bit wooly in my thinking, and I experiment by taking something random like "mouse", and I sit and concentrate on images of mice for an hour, chanting "mouse, mouse, mouse", and then I'm sitting later watching TV and suddenly a trailer for a wildlife documentary includes a mouse, I will consider this good evidence and think I'm making progress. This is the kind of 'evidence' people 'find' all the time, but if you learn about the principles involved in this kind of thing, you discover that there are natural psychological pressures to believe these are significant events when they are pure coincidence.

Actually, this is just stating IM in a negative way. There is no overall order to the universe, except the one I am creating. Is it a psychological delusion to see patterns where there are none? Then every person on the planet is deluded. This is what we do. You couldn't walk down the road otherwise.

Why do you lament what you are? So you can become a robot? What's the point?

Whatever you believe, you will summon the evidence to prove it. That's my hypothesis. It goes far beyond seeing a mouse on tv.

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

Here's a simple example:

If I believe I am a complete loser with the ladies, than my chances of getting laid are pretty bad. If I believe that I am a real stud muffin, my chances greatly improve. If I maintain my focus on either belief over a period of time, MY reality will consistently provide me feedback to prove what I believe.

If I believe I am a stud muffin and a pretty woman tells me something to the contrary, I won't even hear her. If I believe I'm a loser, I would hold on to every syllable of her insults. If I were to chose to believe that I am neither stud nor loser, my results would be 50/50.

So, yes, my belief changes my reality. Not the absolute reality. There is no such thing. Just my reality.

[mercuryrising]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

Subjective reality is an interesting belief. It is no more than that, though, but I see some defend it just as vehemently as fundamentalist Christians defend their religion.

You live in an objective reality?

[pianoperformer]

Mercuryrising,

I understand that our senses render everything subjective, but I'm talking about the non-duality one consciousness view.

[mercuryrising]

Originally Posted by John Freestone

I try to practise passivity in my meditation, to sit with whatever is and just observe, just be in fact. What I find is that out of that naturally comes an incredibly deep joy and peace that surpasses any I could sit kindling with nice thoughts and beach imagery! It seems boundlessly creative, too, even on personal things - answers to worries, ideas I'm working on, poetry, music, whatever - as long as I am genuinely passive and, I think, grateful, humble about what might come to me. After all, everything that comes is a gift. I didn't ask to be born, I used to rant. Also, I didn't create anything. Everything in my life came to me, was given to me. It arrived. I had absolutely nothing to do with it. Probably.

Hey look, I kept it brief again! Must stop meditating.

Sounds like your connecting with, I don't know, a power greater than yourself. God or something.

[pianoperformer]

Originally Posted by mercuryrising

Sounds like your connecting with, I don't know, a power greater than yourself. God or something.

Or, he is just letting go and relaxing, thereby feeling peaceful.

[mercuryrising]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

Mercuryrising,

I understand that our senses render everything subjective, but I'm talking about the non-duality one consciousness view.

I have had the experience on more than one occasion in my life when I look at others and realize that is me in another form, looking through another pair of eyes.

Then again, I am one of the most impractical weirdos I know.

[John Freestone]

That's weird, I was trying to quote you pianoperformer and I keep getting wolfgang's text in the message box. I even just tried Reply at the bottom and got wolfgang's. WTF?

Anyway, I just wanted to say thanks for saying that you agree with me. That defensiveness is something we all do I reckon, at least I've hardly found anyone who is above it, and I'm not. I understand that it's difficult for some people here to deal with criticism of IM. It's important to recognise that we are not our beliefs, and then we can debate without too much difficulty.

BTW, I wonder if you or anyone knows what that multi-quote button does between the quote and quick reply buttons. I'm darned if I can work out if it's doing anything...unless pressing it earlier is why I got the wrong quoted message here? I imagined it would quote each paragraph of a post separately or something, but it just highlights and nothing seems any different.

:- gobless

[cylon]

Say you're reading this thread, and want to make a response to separate people, but you just want to do it with one post.

So you hit the multi-quote for all the posts you want to respond to.

After you've done that, THEN you hit the reply button, and all the quotes will be in your text window, and you can just hit some spaces between each quote to type your reply.

[John Freestone]

Angela darling, you seem to call people 'avatars' sometimes. Wassat? I know they're CGIs of people, like, but do you do this to express the idea that we're Consciousness Generated Identities or something?

A confused silver surfer
BTW, on that other matter, I'm a happily-partnered chocolate-eating watcher already, but flattered cuz I bet you're a babe (even if slightly insane ) and you seem like a very nice person.

[jawillie]

I haven't replied much because I am still figuring out my "stance" in all of this. I do find I get defensive when what IM is is portrayed inaccurately. I don't sit for an hour chanting what I want to come true, for instance. Beyond that, I guess I just feel "frustration" that something I see as common sense is SHREDDED in debate after debate. I know I am not my thoughts or beliefs.... this isn't so much about believing to me, more than it is experiencing.

So, John Freestone, I do have to question... why? Why do you feel the need to "save" people from what they experience as truth? What makes your truth the "ultimate?" Why should I believe a darn word you say???

That sounded more harsh than I meant it...

But, seriously... I can see WHY Christians get defensive.... quit trying to change 'em... let 'em be!!

I mean, even if YOUR truth is the ULTIMATE TRUTH for all.... you can't sell it to others by bashing it over their heads. It just doesn't work that way. People will resist that kind of abrasive attack. We all have our own paths to walk in life. Why do we all have to walk the John Freestone path?

I know, I know... we are all just "discussing" here.... But at what point does discussing just become tiresome?? LOL I am tired. You believe what you believe and no matter HOW many different ways you say it, I will not buy it because I am experiencing something completely different in my life and YOUR explanations don't fit my life. You may see me as "insane" for "buying" LoA or IM and that's fine. I am perfectly happy and content in my insane little life.

[John Freestone]

Originally Posted by mercuryrising

Actually, this is just stating IM in a negative way. There is no overall order to the universe, except the one I am creating.

But mercuryrising, as you say, that is your hypothesis. You would be very silly to suggest that you know absolutely that there is no order to the universe - I imagine you'd agree with that - it's your belief. Furthermore, it seems to me (and a few others) to be a kind of circular belief, or self-defining one. The way I react to that is that yea, it could indeed be the wonderful 'secret' it's said to be, or it could be wrong. There might be an order to the universe, a Truth there to be (at least potentially) uncovered. If it's the latter, it seems a big missed opportunity - all that wonderful kosmos (which means 'order' BTW) to, erm, wonder at. And it does seem wonderful and ordered - incredibly ordered - like all the stars and planets and all the trillions of life-forms and communication and human psychology and mathematics and....etc.! And I know we could be deluding ourselves, but when I talk to other people and they agree there is such and such a planet and such and such a frog and 2 and 2 make 4 (ALG will step in to give me a link here to some weird math, you watch) ... well, it all just seems so beautiful and shared and convincing. Even if it's a shared hallucination, all you seem to be suggesting I replace it with is a personal hallucination, and I see in that as a rather lonely condition and no obvious improvement on what I have.

Is it a psychological delusion to see patterns where there are none? Then every person on the planet is deluded. This is what we do. You couldn't walk down the road otherwise.

Yes, that may be true, but what about the possibility that we might step out of the delusions altogether. It might be another delusion to think we can, but some meditation traditions say it's possible - and a lot of people here describe it, the being in the moment where the meaning is contained in the actuality of experience. I think I experience that too sometimes. I know, I've laboured the point, but that's where I diverge from a lot of the IM stuff - rather than saying "Maybe everything is delusion (cuz I see a wall and there's really just an energy flux or something), therefore to hell with it, let's have fun and manifest my own delusions", I say let's try to see if there's a way to see through them altogether.

I also see worth in having intentions and the good it can do to think positively, etc., and I'm not saying we all have to try to be sages all the time - it's one mode of experience, trying to stop categorising and thinking about experience and just letting it be.

Why do you lament what you are? So you can become a robot? What's the point?

I'm sorry, I don't know what you mean. I don't lament what I am or want to be a robot. Please say more.

Whatever you believe, you will summon the evidence to prove it. That's my hypothesis. It goes far beyond seeing a mouse on tv.

Thanks for saying that, because I've been struggling to work out what this is about: you can't have such a hypothesis, it seems to me. It's not a hypothesis. Bear with me here. A hypothesis is only meaningful in relation to realism. It says something might be true in such a way that it can be tested against ... you guessed it ... Reality.

So what?, you might ask, So 'hypothesis' might be the wrong word. Am I just being pedantic, playing with words? - well, what is it instead? You see, I'd be interested in your answer, but you might not like mine. It's a prejudice, or if you prefer, a supposition, an assumption. It is a hypothesis that can't be tested (if there were such a thing, but there isn't, it's an oxymoron). You live by faith. as I see it. That's fine if that's your thing. I don't mean it as an insult, and I'm sure lots of people will pack you on the back for it. This is all discussion in the interests of us discovering stuff - and I don't mean me educating you either, as I'm sometimes portrayed here - I genuinely mean, let's discuss ... and to hell with who's right. Let's learn and understand more.

Here's a simple example:

If I believe I am a complete loser with the ladies, than my chances of getting laid are pretty bad. If I believe that I am a real stud muffin, my chances greatly improve. If I maintain my focus on either belief over a period of time, MY reality will consistently provide me feedback to prove what I believe.

If I believe I am a stud muffin and a pretty woman tells me something to the contrary, I won't even hear her. If I believe I'm a loser, I would hold on to every syllable of her insults. If I were to chose to believe that I am neither stud nor loser, my results would be 50/50.

So, yes, my belief changes my reality. Not the absolute reality. There is no such thing. Just my reality.

Ok. But let me put this to you. There's a difference between this effect happening because thoughts emanate out in the ether and then whisper sweet nothings in your date's ear and you feeling more confident, putting a little more effort into dressing, wrapping a special present, feeling very relaxed and confident, which makes you find the right word, or stop talking instead of rambling nervously, or speak instead of clamming up, or ask her about herself (that always helps!)...isn't there?

You see, some people here seem to give the impression that it's just magic - none of the other material and psychological stuff happens - it's just weirdness all the way for them and can't or mustn't be understood rationally. Others think it's some psychic force or quantum function or other scientifically rational causation as yet undiscovered (or, usually perhaps, only known to special people, like ALG with his levitating gurus). Others think it's through complex interactions, but perfectly normal ones that we know pretty well already and aren't particularly weird, but might be quite amazing, like pheromones, which apparently convey masses of information between people (especially on dates!) without either of them being aware of it. Other people don't care as long as they get the girl. I'm curious. That's why I'm a philosopher and scientist - I want to know how these things happen, if it's at all possible to know. But I guess part of my world view is that there is a real world, even if it is interpreted by me in strange and distorting ways.

If your 'hypothesis' were true, that whatever you believe brings its evidence to bear, does that make everything the way you wish it to be, and, if not, is it because you don't believe in a particular condition enough, or at a deeper level? This seems to be a perennial question about IM, and those answers about not wanting it really seem weak to me. For one thing, they're just suspiciously convenient, but for another, it suggests a kind of structure of psychology - a 'me' who thinks consciously that I want and deserve something, and a - what shall we call it, it's usually - my unconscious. Now, if that were true, wouldn't that indicate at least some order in the universe?

[John Freestone]

Originally Posted by mercuryrising

Sounds like your connecting with, I don't know, a power greater than yourself. God or something.

Yes, that's what it's often called. I don't know. But it doesn't necessarily mean that. You see, as soon as I think "Hey, when I'm really quiet I feel amazing, peaceful, joyful, loving of everything and everyone. That's God", I'm not being anymore, I'm thinking. Thoughts can be correct or incorrect (probably). Experience in the moment - reality, I like to call it - just is.

Hence, sometimes I believe in God, sometimes I believe that God is a delusion. They're thoughts.

Reality doesn't seem to give a toss either way.

Love could be God, or it could be the experience my genes create in my senses to trick me into passing them on.

I still feel love.

[John Freestone]

Originally Posted by cylon

Say you're reading this thread, and want to make a response to separate people, but you just want to do it with one post.

So you hit the multi-quote for all the posts you want to respond to.

After you've done that, THEN you hit the reply button, and all the quotes will be in your text window, and you can just hit some spaces between each quote to type your reply.

Genius! Thanks cylon.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by John Freestone

Angela darling, you seem to call people 'avatars' sometimes. Wassat? I know they're CGIs of people, like, but do you do this to express the idea that we're Consciousness Generated Identities or something?

Yeah

BTW, on that other matter, I'm a happily-partnered chocolate-eating watcher already, but flattered cuz I bet you're a babe (even if slightly insane ) and you seem like a very nice person.

Yeah, me, too; Danger Man is my co-chocolate-eating partner (he has kids in Sweden who periodically bring us that chokolat stuff ... am I lucky or wat?) and thank you, likewise I'm sure!

[John Freestone]

Originally Posted by jawillie

I haven't replied much because I am still figuring out my "stance" in all of this. I do find I get defensive when what IM is is portrayed inaccurately.

Hi jawillie ... but that's only inaccurate according to your understanding of it.

<snip>

So, John Freestone, I do have to question... why? Why do you feel the need to "save" people from what they experience as truth? What makes your truth the "ultimate?" Why should I believe a darn word you say???

Hey, it's ok. You don't. I'm sorry if I come over that way. My truth is very tentative and I'm very aware that it's ultimate only to me and only temporarily - god knows I've changed my views enough over the years!

That sounded more harsh than I meant it...

It's ok. I've been a SOB. Human nature to defend our ideas and get hot about it sometimes.

But, seriously... I can see WHY Christians get defensive.... quit trying to change 'em... let 'em be!!

Come on, though, surely Christians...?!?!? (Before anyone kicks my teeth in for that one, get a sense of humour and learn to forgive, for Christ's sake. I'm joking and my partner knows it. She's one. Come on you lions!)

I mean, even if YOUR truth is the ULTIMATE TRUTH for all.... you can't sell it to others by bashing it over their heads. It just doesn't work that way. People will resist that kind of abrasive attack. We all have our own paths to walk in life. Why do we all have to walk the John Freestone path?

Please, I can only assume you've really somehow missed a lot of what I wrote. Admittedly, if you didn't you'd have died of old age by now, but...

...I wish I'd chosen a different handle! Please can people call me John, or John F maybe?

I know, I know... we are all just "discussing" here.... But at what point does discussing just become tiresome?? LOL I am tired. You believe what you believe and no matter HOW many different ways you say it, I will not buy it because I am experiencing something completely different in my life and YOUR explanations don't fit my life. You may see me as "insane" for "buying" LoA or IM and that's fine. I am perfectly happy and content in my insane little life.

I'm not forcing you to read my words, you mad ****
Seriously, jawillie, think about it. How does it happen that you turn your computer on, find the one part of the www where my words are, scroll down and read my opinion - and then complain that I'm bashing you over the head with my ultimate truth, or forcibly keeping you awake?

[Angela]

I really like the name John Freestone. It sounds like one of those survivalist wilderness cult leaders, long beard, several wives, little children carrying buckets, occasional midnight full moon orgies.

I just find that image really endearing.