Is The Secret aka LoA Offensive?

[escapee]

We all know that The secret teaches the usefulness of positive thinking or "feeling good". A strong positive intention , as we know , will always lead to positive action and positive biological function (better immune system is associated with happy thought ). I believe "feeling good" naturally (without using drugs) is what the secret is all about.

The miracle man Morris goodman :" I must be doing something right"

[Richard_Todd]

Originally Posted by Radical

I believe in a Theory of Everything (TOE).

So did Einstein.

I think we both know you weren't really responding to what I said, right? A Theory of Everything wouldn't mean that any two observers can agree on what happens in reality. Even if it would, such a theory has not been found.

[Radical]

Originally Posted by Richard_Todd

A Theory of Everything wouldn't mean that any two observers can agree on what happens in reality. Even if it would, such a theory has not been found.

A Theory of everything (TOE) is a hypothetical theory of theoretical physics that fully explains and links together all known physical phenomena.

Therefore, it wouldn't matter whether two observers can agree upon what they thought happened in reality, because a TOE would explain what really happened in reality.

And yes such a theory has not been found, and is probably a long way off from being found.

[Richard_Todd]

Originally Posted by Radical

Therefore, it wouldn't matter whether two observers can agree upon what they thought happened in reality, because a TOE would explain what really happened in reality.

Unfortunately, I don't think that's what the TOE is for. TOE wants to unify currently disconnected theories of physics. But, two observers would only be able to apply it to their own observations, which would be different in the first place. Different inputs lead to different outputs.

Think of basic time-dilation for near-lightspeed travel. A TOE wouldn't be able to say how much time really passed during the trip, for all observers. For the travellers, one amount of time passed, and for the people left behind, a quite different amount of time passed. There's not a single right answer.

From here, it's not too hard for me to extrapolate that a whole lot of what I consider to be reality is merely rooted in what I personally perceive. I can imagine how someone with a different set of beliefs is experiencing a very different world than I am. I'm an Atheist, so I see proof of this every time my Christian friends say that God did something. For them, He did. For me, there is another explanation.

[Holistic Star]

I have a problem with IM in the sense that I have trouble accepting that abused children were responsible for attracting their abuse. I would appreciate some clarity on that one.

One the idea of being responsible for illness, I have less of a problem. It is widely acknowledged that certain diseases are exacerbated by emotion, e.g. stomach ulcers, heart conditions are known to be made worse by prolonged stress. And I believe that we are responsible for our emotions.

My take on illness is that repeated negative emotions or thoughts (often subconscious) disrupt our energy systems. In the short term, this isn't noticable and the energy body can repair itself. However if these patterns continue, they lodge in the physical body.

The body then draws attention to these problems by subtle signals, headache, soreness, a small patch of dry skin, sleeplessness, tightness in the chest etc. However, we are conditioned to ignore this and try to battle through. We take a painkiller to kill the message our body is giving us rather than deal with the source of the problem. We take a sleeping pill to knock ourselves out. If the emotional distress gets stronger, we perk ourselves up on caffeine, chocolate, alcohol, nicotine, etc or distract ourselves by filling our lives up with meaningless junk. The body then tries to signal more and more that something is wrong, and more does become wrong as pathways block, hormonal feedback loops go haywire and a downward spiral starts.

(I also believe there is an environmental problem here due to the amount of toxic chemicals in the environment compared with only 150 years ago. Our physical and energy bodies simply can't cope with the continued disruption (caused by pesticides, pollution and electro-magnetic waves etc) and so don't right themselves naturally, especially if there is additional emotional distress).

I say this as someone who ignored my body's subtle messages for years and only took notice when my body started screaming at me to 'DO SOMETHING!' This is what set me on the path to understand that I am responsible for the emotions I have suppressed that my body is desperately trying to get me to deal with.

I have eliminated many physical problems I had purely by working on an emotional level where conventional medicine failed - conditions such as backpain, RSI, bronchitis, asthma and hayfever (still working on eczema).

I think the problem is that we aren't taught to manage our emotions and energy systems as part of our schooling. We are taught to pretend we don't care when we are upset, tough it out, block it down. This supression of emotion is what I think caused me years of illness. It took a long time to find what the emotions were as they were so buried, I didn't even know they were there. It's been trial and error learning how to release emotions and blocked energy in a healthy way and I only wish this information was widely available.

So going back to the LoA - yes I believe I attracted my illnesses due to the specific unresolved emotions I had, which blocked my energy system and caused a physical issue. This is why it is important to deal with emotional upset as soon as possible, because once it becomes lodged in the physical body and starts to cause physical problems not only do you have to deal with the emotional issue, but the physical body needs to physically heal aswell.
I think you really do attract what you focus on.

[Leandro Leme]

Originally Posted by Radical

I believe in a Theory of Everything (TOE).

So did Einstein.

Hello,

A Theory of (really) Everything should connect much more than empirical science and systems theory, since there are plenty of other fields in human knowledge and experience. There are some people doing it, like this guy. You can take a detailed look here, the Integral Institute.

L

[Leandro Leme]

Originally Posted by Holistic Star

I have a problem with IM in the sense that I have trouble accepting that abused children were responsible for attracting their abuse. I would appreciate some clarity on that one.

Hello,

Have you read this article by Steve? Child abuse is one of the broached topics.

L

[ABlix]

I can explain this a little bit, I used to be as what steve called "Submissive," undervalue to oneself. Men told me to do things, and I didn't know what to do. I was so confused that any order I would take to heart. I was so focused on pleasing others, that I did not leave any room to be pleased myself. For example, one would buy others a gift instead of treating yourself to a well-deserved chocolate shake. There's no reason not to treat yourself as long as you are healthy

but for others..it's not offensive anything you do, it's simply a wrongful thinking command method. This is why judging others gets us in trouble. When you judge any stereotype, you are immediately judging yourself under subjective reality, which is why it's very difficult to sustain momentum when you're intolerant.

[nolan22]

remember that it's not JUST thinking.

"When we have inspired thought, we have to trust it, and we have to act upon it."

LoA: Think--->feel--->act--->manifestation

[Dharma]

Originally Posted by Holistic Star

I have a problem with IM in the sense that I have trouble accepting that abused children were responsible for attracting their abuse. I would appreciate some clarity on that one.

It takes two to tango when you play the victim/perpetrator game. What you might not see is the unconscious of the infant/child is running the show and creating the experiences. There isn't enough consciousness yet to steer their experiences away from how they see their world working, so it's quite easy for them to fall into an abusive situation.

[Dating Specialist]

Originally Posted by Holistic Star

I have eliminated many physical problems I had purely by working on an emotional level where conventional medicine failed - conditions such as backpain, RSI, bronchitis, asthma and hayfever (still working on eczema).

Would you share how are you working on eczema through your emotional level? I'm very keen to find out. Thanks!

Originally Posted by Holistic Star

I think you really do attract what you focus on.

Agree. Because what you focus on, expands.

[SamBeaven]

Also, this kind of thinking has the potential to cause people serious harm! People who are seriously ill might stop taking treatment or medication, believing that positive thoughts alone are the answer to all their prayers.

It also suggests that every attempt at solving one of the worlds problems, i.e. terrorism, hunger, poverty etc (causes people have died for) has all just been a waste of time and energy. Instead it suggests we simply think positive thoughts, in the hope that the universe will somehow magically solve all our problems and make all our dreams come true... you can't be serious?

"You don't want to negate medicine: every form of healing has a place"
~Dr John F DeMartini, about an hour into the movie.

Oh, and Jack Canfield talks about how Mother Theresa said that she'd never attend an anti-war rally: only a pro-peace rally.

So I don't think some of you guys are quite getting what The Secret is saying: it's not that if someone has a deadly illness they should completely ignore medicine, or that to help other people we should stop giving to charity, or that if we lie in the middle of a field the LoA will bring all the stuff we need to us and we don't have to work or anything - there is action involved, and the things you attract may not necessarily arrive in the shape you initially imagined them. I've talked about this in the left-hand losing thread, that the universe manifests what you need based on your intention rather than exactly what you intend.

[songwriter]

For those who strongly believe in subjective reality... don't try to argue with the ones against of it... they are just a manifestation you create . Just check your fears about it and then the things would change, their opinions are created by you!.

Even exactly this that now I'm writing.
Though I don't agree with S-R. But if you believe in it, you have even make me not believe.

[Radical]

Originally Posted by ABlix

EDIT -Sadhana

This is a discussion about whether or not LoA is offensive, not about what arouses you sexually.

[Radical]

Originally Posted by Dharma

It takes two to tango when you play the victim/perpetrator game. What you might not see is the unconscious of the infant/child is running the show and creating the experiences. There isn't enough consciousness yet to steer their experiences away from how they see their world working, so it's quite easy for them to fall into an abusive situation.

Quite simply, this disturbs me. You are entitled to your opinion, but please don't become a counsellor!

[Radical]

Originally Posted by songwriter

For those who strongly believe in subjective reality... don't try to argue with the ones against of it... they are just a manifestation you create . Just check your fears about it and then the things would change, their opinions are created by you!.

Even exactly this that now I'm writing.
Though I don't agree with S-R. But if you believe in it, you have even make me not believe.

Nice post. I totally agree with this. If you don't believe in anything outside of your own mind, then go meditate in isolation. However, most of us prefer to live in the real world.

PS I hate the term "real world", since everyone has different perceptions. However, some people are too far stuck in their imagination.

[Richard_Todd]

Originally Posted by Radical

If you don't believe in anything outside of your own mind, then go meditate in isolation. However, most of us prefer to live in the real world.

Do people with different beliefs than yours make you uncomfortable? Since the S-R people see you as part of their own consciousness (which, by the way, is not in their minds), you can be assured that they mean you no harm... there's really no reason you should need to tell them to get away from you and your "real" world. :-) Unless you were just looking for a way to say "I'm abrasive and difficult to converse with" without just coming out and saying it.

[Radical]

Originally Posted by Richard_Todd

Do people with different beliefs than yours make you uncomfortable?

Not usually, however in extreme cases yes. Quite frankly I am offended by some of the claims supporters of LoA are making, such as innocent children bringing abuse upon themselves.

There comes a time when you have to say enough is enough!

[Holistic Star]

Ok - here is what that article says about child abuse:

These questions seem to weaken the plausibility of the Law of Attraction. Sometimes people answer them by going pretty far out. For example, it’s been said by LoAers that a young child experiences abuse because s/he intended it or earned it during a past life. Well, sure… we can explain just about anything if we bring past lives into the equation, but IMO that’s a cop-out. On the other hand, objective reality without the Law of Attraction doesn’t provide satisfactory answers either — supposedly some kids are just born unlucky. That’s a cop-out too.

I’ve never been satisfied by others’ answers to these questions, and they’re pretty important questions if the Law of Attraction is to be believed. Some books hint at the solution but never really nail it. That nail, however, can be found in the concept of subjective reality.
.....

If a child is abused, does that mean the child intended it in some way?

No. It means YOU intended it. You intend child abuse to manifest simply by thinking about it. The more you think about child abuse (or any other subject), the more you’ll see it expand in your reality. Whatever you think about expands, and not just in the narrow space of your avatar but in all of physical reality.

I still don't get Steve's post. I just don't understand why I (or part of my consciousness) would intend such a thing.

Refering to the posts, I find the 'it takes two to tango comment' from Dharma offensive in the extreme, mainly because it is used in the context of justifying affairs between consenting adults, rather than a child who in all probability doesn't even know what sex is. I think the problem is that we naturally extrapolate responsibility to apportioning blame (not saying this is right, just what happens). And I think it is the implication that the fault is entirely on the child for 'attracting' it is offensive and unhelpful and clearly causes some problems when trying to explain the LoA.

Lets just say that the child did have a negative vibration due to negative emotions, fear, shame, guilt, sadness etc that 'attracted' the perpetrator. It was still the perpertrator that decided to take that step and physically abuse the child. The perpetrator had a choice: To act, or not to act. To screw someone elses life up or to take respoinsibility for his own mental, emotional, spiritual state that 'attracted' him to the victim. I'm sure that the majority of people if they spent time with a vulnerable, troubled child would seek to be kind and thoughtful rather than abusive. Surely this underlines that it is the responsibility of the perpetrator, not the child.

It may even have been that the child was vibrating at such a pure vibration of love and innocence that this twisted the perpetrators mind that they wanted to own it/ possess it / destroy it. The child sure would be operating at a lower emotional level after this happened.

I don't think the existance of abuse negates the LoA, but I need to think about it more to understand it.

[SamBeaven]

Originally Posted by Radical

Not usually, however in extreme cases yes. Quite frankly I am offended by some of the claims supporters of LoA are making, such as innocent children bringing abuse upon themselves.

There comes a time when you have to say enough is enough!

Mmmm, I'd agree with anyone who said that the children were bringing it on themselves deliberately - that they were asking for it and really secretly desired their abuse. I don't think that's the case either (and I agree that that would be a dangerous belief, as it could be used to justify child abuse).

I do think, however, that ongoing mental states can lead to the perpetuation of abuse, not so much out of desire but out of homeostasis (the human body and consciousness fears change and tries to avoid it wherever possible, even if it's in an actively destructive state - you can see this in addiction, in body temperature, in relationships, diet, pretty much everything). It's not so much that it's the child's fault, and I'd hesitate to say that they were even responsible for it if they didn't know what they were doing - rather, the victim mentality prevents them from getting away from it.

[jdiddy]

Originally Posted by Radical

Not usually, however in extreme cases yes. Quite frankly I am offended by some of the claims supporters of LoA are making, such as innocent children bringing abuse upon themselves.

There comes a time when you have to say enough is enough!

Unfortunately, whether you like an idea or not has no bearing on how correct it is.

[Athena]

" You intend child abuse to manifest simply by thinking about it. The more you think about child abuse (or any other subject), the more you’ll see it expand in your reality. Whatever you think about expands, and not just in the narrow space of your avatar but in all of physical reality. "

- from Steve's article


Can the universe differentiate between 'manifesting' thoughts and 'neutral' or observation thoughts? For example, is a medical student manifesting more disease in the world simply by studying the dieases in her textbook?

I don't think so. I think that all THOUGHT cannot be grouped into one category that says that all thoughts will be manifested into physical reality. (If it were so, we wouldn't need any fancy I-M protocols for phrasing intention thoughts.) There must be distinctions between intention thoughts and passive non-intention thoughts.

Similarly, I don't think that LoA is a universal principle that governs all thought, but rather is ONE law of thought energy that works with certain types of thoughts.

[Radical]

I don't believe that thoughts will manifest into reality without us acting upon them.

People have weird thoughts all the time, and I think it's stupid to limit our thoughts to only those that we want to manifest.

What about women who have rape fantasies? Does LoA mean that if they get raped, then it's their fault for having fantasies about it?

[Richard_Todd]

Originally Posted by Radical

What about women who have rape fantasies? Does LoA mean that if they get raped, then it's their fault for having fantasies about it?

Just a thought: All the objections, as with rape and child abuse, seem to be about assigning blame for the events. Instead of thinking about LoA as a method to assign blame, maybe it's best to think of it as an explanation of how things happen. After all, maybe there's a larger view than just the rape or abuse in isolation. Such as, a woman gets raped and gets the rapist prosecuted and off the streets, preventing many more rapes. Or the abused child grows up to be a counselor that helps hundreds of children get out of similar situations.

There's also a positive side to the LoA coin: yeah, they manifested the unpleasant events, but they also have the power to put an end to them via the same mechanism.

And I guess the last thing I'll say, after my experience with abused and depressed people, is that the ones I've known actually do want it to continue. They identify with their pain, and indirectly try to make the problem worse and more permanent. It can be a real struggle to help them initially, because a part of them is really scared to get better. I can't say firsthand whether they attracted the initial incident into their lives, but I am confident that they get into a pattern that attracts more of it.

[Dharma]

Originally Posted by Athena

I don't think so. I think that all THOUGHT cannot be grouped into one category that says that all thoughts will be manifested into physical reality. (If it were so, we wouldn't need any fancy I-M protocols for phrasing intention thoughts.) There must be distinctions between intention thoughts and passive non-intention thoughts.

Or, thoughts have nothing to do with manifestation.

Originally Posted by Richard Todd

Just a thought: All the objections, as with rape and child abuse, seem to be about assigning blame for the events.

Good observation.

[Radical]

Here's how I think LoA works:

Although I don't believe thoughts can have a direct affect on your reality without some action on your part, I do believe thoughts can greatly affect what you attract in to your life, but not in the way LoA explains it.

I think most people would agree upon the fact that peoples thoughts greatly influence their actions, and so consequently what you think about will create your reality to some extent.

However, have you ever considered how much power thoughts really have over our actions? Thoughts can have a great impact on many things, for example body language, posture, facial expressions, mood, choice of clothing, manner of speech etc. So you see, if you think about it thoughts really do have a tremendous impact on our reality.

LoA puts what we attract in to our lives down to some poorly explained pseudoscientific/supernatural theory. However, I believe that the real cause for what we attract in to our lives is our actions, albeit very subtle and seemingly insignificant actions.

An example could be someone wakes up in a particularly good mood, after dreaming about a relationship with their ideal partner. Therefore, that day this person decides to spend some extra time on their hair and decides to wear their favourite bright red shirt. Lets say this person is male. His good mood is also prevalent in his posture and body language, ensuring he is sending off positive vibes to everyone that he encounters. By chance, he catches a girl smiling at him, this further increases his positive mood and now he is exuberant with confidence. At work he sees a girl who resembles the person from his dream, he decides to make eye contact with her. She smiles at him, and is attracted by his positive vibes, nice hairstyle and good dress sense. Given the positive and confident mood he's in, he decides to approach her and ask her out - unsuprisingly she accepts his invitation.

So you can see how some people might misinterpret this example and put it down to LoA, when really there is a logical explanation. The initial positive thought created a chain of actions, which ultimately led to a desirable outcome.

[mej023]

The Law of Attraction is a universal law. It cannot be offensive.
Replace the LoA with another law.... how about the Law of Gravity.

Now replace the LoA with the LoG (in the title of this thread). It doesn't matter if I am offended by gravity. It just is. How can it be offensive?

[Radical]

Originally Posted by mej023

The Law of Attraction is a universal law. It cannot be offensive.
Replace the LoA with another law.... how about the Law of Gravity.

Now replace the LoA with the LoG (in the title of this thread). It doesn't matter if I am offended by gravity. It just is. How can it be offensive?

You are wrong. LoA is unprovable pseudoscience and is definately not equivalent to the law of gravity.

The law of gravity can be proved empirically, and the results are always the same. LoA however is based on unproven pseudoscience, and there is no way to test the theory empirically.

[Richard_Todd]

Originally Posted by Radical

The law of gravity can be proved empirically, and the results are always the same. LoA however is based on unproven pseudoscience, and there is no way to test the theory empirically.

Well, we really only have theories of gravity, right? We know for certain that gravity exists, but all we can do is try to make better and better models that predict its effect. And, the key is, those models don't have to be provably real... they just have to be useful. No one needs to capture a jar full of gravitons, or a bucket of space-time, to use them, you know?

So, I see LoA the same way. I think many of us can agree that staying focused on our goals and taking advantage of synchronicities tends to breed success, and opposite for focusing on negative things. SR is one theory of how that might work. Your previous post about the way thoughts have an impact on the way you see and notice things is another theory of how it might work (and, it's the idea I keep coming back to, myself, actually).

[jdiddy]

Originally Posted by Radical

You are wrong. LoA is unprovable pseudoscience and is definately not equivalent to the law of gravity.

The law of gravity can be proved empirically, and the results are always the same. LoA however is based on unproven pseudoscience, and there is no way to test the theory empirically.

The law of gravity can be proven to exist but it can't be explained. Much like the law of intention seems to be in my personal experience. In fact, physicists have such a hard time explaining why gravity is so much weaker than the other physical forces such as electromagnetism and the nuclear forces that the leading theory on it is that gravity leaks from alternate universes into ours. Making blanket statements about what is and is not real science only reveals the limits of knowledge and closedness of mind.