Garbage, all of it.

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

In the pre-Howard Gardner days, natural mental ability was mostly measured in terms of a concept known as IQ.

Gardner wasn't satisfied with this - a single number, the Intelligence Quotient, seemed to him to be inadequate to describe / measure the wide range of mental abilities that human beings have.

Gardner did his research (beginning with brain-impaired children) to identify the different & distinct sorts of mental abilities that human beings have. For example, an idiot savant might be unable to speak or write properly, but might be hugely capable in mathematics / logic puzzles. This suggests that linguistic ability is a separate thing from mathematical / logical ability.

To identify distinct, different sorts of mental abilities, Gardner found it useful to work with young children. With adults, the extra difficulty that arises is that any "abilities" or "lack of abilities" they demonstrate may be due to cultural or environmental factors, rather than anything more intrinsic.

In the end, Gardner identified eight unique types of intelligences:

1. linguistic (relates to language, words)

2. logical/mathematical (concerns logic, cause-&-effect analysis)

3. visuo-spatial (relates to diagrams, images, pictures, sense of proportion)

4. musical (awareness of sounds, rhythms, pitch; how they combine)

5. interpersonal (understanding how other people think / feel / behave)

6. intrapersonal (understanding one's own thoughts / emotions / motivations)

7. bodily-kinesthetic (natural ability with one's own body; important, for example, in sports, dance and other physical activities).

8. naturalist (ability to interpret natural environment - animals, plants, weather etc - probably not much use for urban dwellers; but useful for people living close to nature)

And all this which leads to the idea that "intelligence" isn't a single concept. Instead people can be "smart" in different ways (and also "stupid" in different ways).

Let's take for example, the stereotypical high school nerd - someone who excels in maths and science, but is very bad in sports and poor in making friendss. In MI terms, he has high mathematical/logical intelligence; but is poor in bodily-kinesthetic intelligence and poor in interpersonal intelligence.

Now, of course, as you say, a person's ability in just about anything can be improved through practice, persistence, proper training etc. For example, if the high school nerd practised really, really hard, there's the possibility that he probably could become good in some sport. Nevertheless, it doesn't change the fact that some people have more natural ability than others, in different things.

I'm suggesting that as far as conscious creation with LOA is concerned, intrapersonal intelligence is probably the most directly relevant intelligence. It doesn't mean that other intelligences are not relevant - there are very few human activities where only one kind of intelligence is relevant - but I'm suggesting that for conscious creation, intrapersonal intelligence is most relevant.

You are saying that if a person fails to manifest successfully, it could be due to their goals are not aligned with greater good for all; or they weren't motivated to use LOA properly; or didn't learn the right techniques etc.

HOWEVER - what we're talking about in this thread (before it got heavily sidetracked by Mrs Cogan) are people like Dave Angeles and Floridagal. They apparently did everything right, knew all the LOA theory, practised and persisted with LOA for a considerable time (Floridagal even attended classes or consulted psychics or professional LOA coaches or something ), visualised, thought positive, felt positive ..... and still fell completely flat on their faces.

At the other end of the spectrum, a few individuals who frequent this forum seem to manifest their intentions quite easily, quite successfully and quite regularly. Me, for instance - I started experimenting casually with LOA only in mid 2006, and by 2007, my monthly salary shot up so much that I'm in the 98.5th percentile of all income-tax paying citizens in my country (and I'm not yet 35 years old).

So I am suggesting that this difference (in results with conscious creation) possibly has something to do with the natural distribution of a particular intelligence (intrapersonal intelligence).

I like what you write. And then at the end it still sounds a bit elitist. "natural distributions of particular intelligence" that makes conscious creation work? I just don't see that, sorry. Is that not the same as telling someone they will not be able to manifest? Manifesting intentions of a certain kind of goal for material gain of the ego is maybe not spiritual. However, that you are gaining in your $$ has got to be a good thing and am happy for you since you seem like someone that cares greatly about fellow beings (just my impression from your posts)

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by cylon

I have the intrapersonal intelligence on my side, and what I often think about regarding IM is the emotions I want to feel in life, and they way I want to experience life... I want that connection and sense that I'm at one with the universe. There are things that make me feel that way, friendships, especially writing music, so the things I work on manifesting relate to that. I haven't said "I want a new car!" (even though I do). Some of these material things seem very small to me (even though they are important, of course I want material things).

The other day I said "I am drawing things into my life to help improve my self image" and that is my main focus now. Today at work I stumbled across a public folder of a guy who left a long time ago. There was some mp3s in there with great music, but also "unknown artist"... I listened to unknown artist and it was a series of guided meditations on... improving self image. And a lot of the affirmations it had, were things I've been saying to myself already. Too "coincidental".

But anyway. Maybe I should manifest a mansion, a BMW, and a jet plane or something. Right now I'm manifesting a new job and healthy, positive co-workers, and my own apartment. But maybe I should be thinking "bigger".

Maybe I think too much. Because this post is basically about nothing.

I think your post says everything and is far from nothing. It sounds like you have tunned in very well. Not everyone "needs" the BMW, you know? And you description of the sychronisity shows that. Your focus or intentions are part of your spirit and are showing up along with your desires and drive to write music. I don't usually get a feeling through the internet - but I bet your music is to be heard and people will be enriched to hear your sounds. However, thinking bigger is great as along as you can without that dreaded attachment to that picture. I can't think or dream too big since I get attached and feel a longing - that I must work on, I suppose.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by RT Wolf

It seems to be a fairly simple experiment

Oh, there are numerous ways whereby we can test the possible effects of thought on reality. The basic idea simply goes as follows:

1. An experiment is done. The results are measured. (This is the control group).

2. The same experiment is done again, under essentially the same conditions, except that one additional variable relating to thought is introduced. Again, the results are measured.

In this way, we investigate the possible effects of thought on reality. Any difference in the measured results would / could support the hypothesis that the additional variable had caused the difference. That's basic experimental methodology in science.

Simple illustration. We get a large number of patients, suffering from similar same medical condition / disease. We adjust for variables such as age, severity of symptoms etc, and we divide the patients into two groups.

Both groups are given the same kind of medical treatment. However, one group is asked to do some kind of mental exercise, eg meditate, be hypnotised, visualise good health etc etc.

We then monitor both groups and see whether there is any difference in how quickly the two groups recover from their medical condition / disease.

It's not as if this kind of stuff hasn't been done before. For example, in a 2003 study, researchers from Harvard Medical School found that hypnosis helps broken ankles to heal much faster (on average, six weeks faster than the control group).

In a follow-up study, also by Harvard Medical School, researchers found that hypnosis helps patients with surgical wounds (following surgery for breast cancer) to recover faster.

Harvard Gazette: Hypnosis helps healing

So I trust this example makes it clear that there are certainly many ways whereby the effects of thought on reality can be tested.

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

Oh, there are numerous ways whereby we can test the possible effects of thought on reality. The basic idea simply goes as follows:

1. An experiment is done. The results are measured. (This is the control group).

2. The same experiment is done again, under essentially the same conditions, except that one additional variable relating to thought is introduced. Again, the results are measured.

In this way, we investigate the possible effects of thought on reality. Any difference in the measured results would / could support the hypothesis that the additional variable had caused the difference. That's basic experimental methodology in science.

Simple illustration. We get a large number of patients, suffering from similar same medical condition / disease. We adjust for variables such as age, severity of symptoms etc, and we divide the patients into two groups.

Both groups are given the same kind of medical treatment. However, one group is asked to do some kind of mental exercise, eg meditate, be hypnotised, visualise good health etc etc.

We then monitor both groups and see whether there is any difference in how quickly the two groups recover from their medical condition / disease.

It's not as if this kind of stuff hasn't been done before. For example, in a 2003 study, researchers from Harvard Medical School found that hypnosis helps broken ankles to heal much faster (on average, six weeks faster than the control group).

In a follow-up study, also by Harvard Medical School, researchers found that hypnosis helps patients with surgical wounds (following surgery for breast cancer) to recover faster.

Harvard Gazette: Hypnosis helps healing

So I trust this example makes it clear that there are certainly many ways whereby the effects of thought on reality can be tested.

That sounds like the mind/body connection, not the thoughts create reality connection.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by wolfgang

"natural distributions of particular intelligence" that makes conscious creation work? I just don't see that, sorry. Is that not the same as telling someone they will not be able to manifest?

It's not that I am telling Dave Angeles and Floridagal that they are not able to consciously create. It's themselves who are telling everyone that they are not able to consciously create ... despite (they say) having done everything right.

If Dave and Floridagal are accurate in describing their personal experiences with LOA, then the two most obvious explanations are:

(1) LOA doesn't work; or
(2) LOA doesn't work for them.

Explanation (1) doesn't seem correct to me, because LOA seems to work fine for me. So I go with Explanation (2) - LOA doesn't work for them. Since they claim to have done everything right (in terms of LOA technique), ther must be some other reason for their failure, and I am suggesting that the Multiple Intelligences concept could provide that reason ...

[RT Wolf]

Wolfgang, I believe ALG is just saying that some people have an advantage at conscious creation, like the advantages that do exist in the world. Does that mean they can't become better at conscious creation? Of course not. They could simply intend to become better manifesters. ALG's hypothesis might explain the immediate problem that they are having, though. I have my own pet hypothesis: that IM is an advanced concept in PD and that you are better off doing other stuff (like improvin emotionally, or spiritually, depending on what that word means to you) before you approach IM.

I get the impression that you don't really like any sort of inequality in this manner? This isn't about judgement, this is simply about ability. If ALG rates a 9 out of 10 on the intrapersonal scale and I rate a 5, its that he might have had a natural advantage, and that he's practiced it. I can become a 9, though, maybe even a 10 through greater practice.

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

It's not that I am telling Dave Angeles and Floridagal that they are not able to consciously create. It's themselves who are telling everyone that they are not able to consciously create ... despite (they say) having done everything right.

If Dave and Floridagal are accurate in describing their personal experiences with LOA, then the two most obvious explanations are:

(1) LOA doesn't work; or
(2) LOA doesn't work for them.

Explanation (1) doesn't seem correct to me, because LOA seems to work fine for me. So I go with Explanation (2) - LOA doesn't work for them. Since they claim to have done everything right (in terms of LOA technique), ther must be some other reason for their failure, and I am suggesting that the Multiple Intelligences concept could provide that reason ...

OK, that;s a fine suggestion after all, I guess. What would be the next step for them? Wouldn't they also be able to manifest with intention? But could it be that they have been kind of barking up the wrong tree? Well, I mean asking for things for that the ego wants instead of finding what the spirit is whispering?

OK, so there some intelligence that is involved. But is that intelligence just the ability to recongnize what is possible to manifest with one's current set of beliefs and thinking and a failure to recognize that it may not be for the good of all or ]isn't actually part of their spiritual plan? Is it really that everyone can manifest a BMW? Or is it that certain people can because the spirit can agree that will help the good of all?

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by wolfgang

That sounds like the mind/body connection, not the thoughts create reality connection.

The former is surely a subset of the latter? In fact, many LOA books, such as the Hicks', would also discuss how to use your thoughts to improve the state of your health.

But anyway it is equally possible to do experiments whereby we investigate the effects of thoughts on some aspect of reality other than the thinker's own body. Some examples from the world's leading universities:

(1) Robert Rosenthal (Harvard University) has an experiment whereby certain people are tricked into believing that the rats that they have been given belong to some "superior" breed possessing high intelligence. Other people are tricked into believing that their own rats belong to some "inferior" breed and are mentally slow. (Actually the rats are of the same breed).

All the people are then required to train their rats to navigate a maze. Rats believed to be super-smart get through the maze much faster than rats believed to be stupid. (Many of the rats believed to be stupid never make it through the maze at all).

(2) William Tiller (Stanford University) gets a small group of experienced meditators to meditate and send positive energy to some fruit fly eggs. These eggs hatch faster, and the larvae grow faster, and the fruit fly live longer, than the eggs/larvae/flies in the control group.

(3) Robert Jahn (Princeton University / ex-NASA rocket scientist) has an experiment where there is a random event generator (think of it as an electronic coin flipper that in the long run, should produce heads and tails in a proportion that goes closer and closer to 50/50). He investigates the effect of a person's thoughts on the REG results (analogous to whether a person intending "Heads", "Heads", "Heads", will exert a statistically significant result on the final outcome).

Once you consider the (diverse) examples above, you will probably see that it's quite possible to devise all sorts of experiments testing the effect of thoughts on reality in different ways.

Rosenthal's experiment could be re-done in many different ways (eg by substituting rats with some other living things and substituting maze navigation with some other task). In fact Rosenthal's experiment has been replicated on human children (in place of rats, and with IQ tests in place of maze navigation) and that is the experiment for which Rosenthal is most famous.

William Tiller's experiment could also be re-done in many different ways (get experienced meditators to meditate on all sorts of different things - apple seeds? Cancer cells? Goldfish? - and compare results with the control group).

More interesting to me would be experiments along these lines (because I am really more interested in human beings, than in fruit flies or rats or electronic coin flippers):

take a big group of people involved in a certain activity; divide them into two groups; adjust for variables; and get one group to think positive thoughts. Then you check for statistically significant differences in the results of the activity done by the two groups.

Specific examples - you could measure the performance of students in a certain academic course; or the pass rates of soldiers in a certain military training course; or the recovery rates of alcoholics undergoing rehab; or the rate of promotion of 3,000 young executives, or whatever.

In each case, you'd have a control group, and you'd have another group where the members would, say, do a guided meditation or a hypnosis session or a visualisation exercise three times a week, focusing on thoughts with themes like "I am an excellent student"; "I can pass this course and become a commando"; "I do very well in my career". etc etc.

So, yes, the effects of LOA are not only testable, but testable in a wide variety of different ways.

[mochamajesty]

Originally Posted by wolfgang

OK, that;s a fine suggestion after all, I guess. What would be the next step for them? Wouldn't they also be able to manifest with intention? But could it be that they have been kind of barking up the wrong tree? Well, I mean asking for things for that the ego wants instead of finding what the spirit is whispering?

OK, so there some intelligence that is involved. But is that intelligence just the ability to recongnize what is possible to manifest with one's current set of beliefs and thinking and a failure to recognize that it may not be for the good of all or ]isn't actually part of their spiritual plan? Is it really that everyone can manifest a BMW? Or is it that certain people can because the spirit can agree that will help the good of all?

If I may interrupt...

At first, I read ALG's posts the same way you did. But when I thought about it, what he said made perfect sense.

I think that when it comes to manifesting, we have to start where we are. If I am living in squalor, my thoughts and beliefs have gotten me to this point. So, asking for a mansion may be too big of a leap for me. In fact, maybe I should work on my beliefs about myself before asking for anything material at all. So maybe the two people who aren't getting the results are asking for something that is too far out of reach considering where they are now. Only they (and the Universe) knows for sure.

I would like to think that the Universe is non-judgemental; that when I ask for something, the Universe doesn't say "Oh, that is for your ego, I'm not going to give it to you". I really don't think that you HAVE to use LOA only for spiritual purposes.

[cylon]

Originally Posted by wolfgang

but I bet your music is to be heard and people will be enriched to hear your sounds.

Thanks wofgang, I'm sure you're right.

[cylon]

Originally Posted by RT Wolf

IM is an advanced concept in PD and that you are better off doing other stuff (like improvin emotionally, or spiritually, depending on what that word means to you) before you approach IM.

And if you approach IM you may find (like I did) that if you hadn't done enough proper PD beforehand, you'll probably be forced into doing that PD anyway.

Along with intentions being manifested and synchronicities and things like that comes a connection to your "true self" that you may not have felt before and if that "true self" has issues with your "conscious self" IM (or anything that requires a change of perspective about life--and to learn to let go of struggle) will absolutely make you face that conflict and it's not always fun.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by cylon

And if you approach IM you may find (like I did) that if you hadn't done enough proper PD beforehand, you'll probably be forced into doing that PD anyway.

Here's an idea. Apart from "magical things", one may just as well use LOA for the more prosaic versions of "personal development". For example, under the broad umbrella of PD, we have broad areas such as"

"health & fitness"; "personal finances"; and "time management".

If you don't believe that you could use the LOA to "magically" manifest health; money; time etc, then what you could do is use the LOA to manifest things like:

more self-motivation to exercise regularly;
more discipline in saving regularly;
more ideas on how to get things done efficiently.

P.S Of course, LOA may still give you a "magical" surprise with how it makes your intention come true. For example, my personal LOA records tell me that on 2 November 2007, I manifested for more time. See what happened 5 days later.

P.P.S Of course the above example may be dismissed as just a strange coincidence. Then as you conscientiously practise your LOA, you'll get another strange coincidence .... and another .... and another ..... and another .... and another ..... all helping you towards your goals. Then one day you will see ....... as the great psychologist Carl Jung did .... that there are no coincidences.

[cylon]

Cool ALG. When the synchronicites started, I kept saying "coincidence", but they happened too frequently. I can't deny what I'm seeing happening around me... but it really SCARED me. Of course when they happened, they weren't scary AT ALL... every time a "synkro" would happen I felt fantastic.

It was AFTER, when I was back in the state of my every day "negativity" that I had to deal with this sci-fi stuff that seemed to be happening in my life. It's a lot to process. Like... if you decided one day "man, I want to understand French" then you'd start hearing people speak in French and you'd be like "wow! I don't even know French and I can understand this language! Cool!"

Then a little while later you'd think "Uh... I don't speak French. Why am I understanding a language I never learned. I'm getting a little freaked out here. This isn't normal. No more French."

So like you said, I've changed my goals for the time being. I want to draw as many things into my life that make me feel good and deserving of abundance. It's the only way of facing this "new" reality. I like many people grew up thinking you only got the good stuff if you struggled for it, that you weren't worth much unless you really suffered in life. So to go from that to actually GETTING something without having to EARN it is a big value/self-image change.

So I'm facing a lifetime of negative self-image, mixed in with people on tv repeating the things I write down as I write them and people calling me that I haven't talked to in ages just a few hours after I think "I wonder what they are up to". Or it's my birthday and I am thinking "you know, there's a lot of abundance in my life" and there's a $20 bill lying in the street. Sometimes it's too much.


I don't want to "bust my ass" for what I want. What I want is to feel good about not having to bust my ass in the first place.

Future posts will be more to the point. This is a good place to "let it out".

(PS-- much of this stuff started happening after I rediscovered a book I bought years ago "the Tao of Psychology" which is about Jung)

[RT Wolf]

^ Heh, do like I did and get a blog. Journalling is also awesome for this respect, but I sometimes just feel like explaining someting to someone at length. Just a different feeling with another person.

Its interesting you mention busting your ass for what you want. I also want to take effortless action, rather than hard, difficult manifestations.

I also read that book, but it didn't really do anything for me. Perhaps I shall revisit it.

You and I sound like we're on a similar page, we should have a long chat sometime.

[cylon]

Cool. Yeah I do have a journal and pour it out there too. I think I'm going through a great "resistance purge" .

[Lil Chris]

I found this the other day... Might pose some interesting questions to those on the scientific lean...

Link

You may have to sign up, but it's free (I'm not affiliated in any way with this site) just thought it was a good listen... It sites refferences to Teleportation, remote viewing, etc...

Quote from site

The Synchronized Universe

Dr. Claude Swanson was educated as a physicist at MIT and Princeton University. During those years he worked at the MIT Science Teaching Center, Brookhaven National Laboratory and a Virginia cyclotron in the summer. At Princeton he received the National Science Foundation Fellowship and Putnam Fellowship. His Ph.D. thesis at Princeton was done in the "Gravity Group," which focuses on experimental cosmology and astronomy, and was headed by Nobel laureate Robert Dicke. His thesis advisor was Prof. David Wilkinson, who later became chairman of the physics department.
For the last fifteen years, interspersed with his conventional professional career in applied physics, Dr. Swanson has pursued investigations into "unconventional physics." His principal interest has been unified field theory, the so-called "Theory of Everything" which could explain the universe at the deepest possible level. This has led him to investigate many aspects of the paranormal, which appear to be completely real phenomena which violate our present science.
Paranormal phenomena, which have now been proven in the laboratory in many cases, offer a window into the deeper universe, the mysteries of consciousness, and unlock new forces and principles which conventional science has only begun to glimpse

[fellowtraveler]

I'm just another ****** on the internet....well, not really but that's the most non-threateniing intro I could come up with...

Anyhow, I know it works. I think it's possible to have slight doubts occasionally and still have it work, but that's not ideal. You simply have to let go - it seems contradictory, but it's true...keep the intention in your mind, but not in anxiety...just keep it there so it doesn't fade. Decide on the intention, and then let the universe take over. Just decide that it's going to happen and that's that.

And, if it doesn't happen, there's a good reason for it. Say I decide a certain number is going to win the lottery for me. Well, no matter what my intentions, there might be someone else who needs the money more than I do at the time, and they decided on a different number. Oh well.

And I think it's not a matter of earning anything or deserving anything - if you're vibrating correctly and not feeling constant anxiety, it will come.

Too, I find that the more momentous the purpose of the intention is, the more likely the universe will manifest it. My adult son suffered a psychotic breakdown a year ago. He got better, but had a relapse a few months ago and had to come live with us. I got him to resume taking a medication that he'd stopped (not his main med..this is an antidepressant). When one resumes a medication, oft-times it won't work as quickly or as well, or sometimes not at all.

Well, two weeks came and went, then three...and he only seemed to be getting worse. But at the begnning I had told myself that 6 weeks would be the cutoff...if it didn't work after 6 weeks, it wasn't going to - but my intention was that it would work.. What do you think happened? Six weeks to the day after he resumed the med, he began to rise up out of his illness. It was spooky, but I "knew" it would happen.

So, don't tell me it's a bunch of crap, dude. Just by saying that, you negate any possibility of it ever happening for you. If you have negativity, you are negativity, and you will receive negativity.

Which reminds me...two atoms were walking down the street, and one turned to the other and said, "Ooops, I just lost an electron!" The other atom says, "Are you sure?", and the first atom answers, "Yes...I'm positive!".

Think about it.

[MrsCogan]

Originally Posted by Lil Chris

Originally Posted by MrsCogan:
"so persistent that it existed for billions of years before you were born and will exist for billions of years after you die."

LilChris:
Prove it...Prove it...

I don't have to. It was proved over 100 years ago. That ship sailed a long time before either of us was born.

[MrsCogan]

Quote: