Personal Development for Smart People^TM Forums

AlanFurth · 08-27-2008, 01:11 PM

Hi all,

I am a bit puzzled about how the intention of the 1-million USD experiment is phrased, as it seems to have an internal contradiction in terms of polarity.

The intention is phrased this way:

In an easy and relaxed manner,
In a healthy and positive way,
In its own perfect time,
For the highest good of all,
I intend 1,000,000 USD to come into my life,
And into the lives of everyone who holds this intention

The problem is that there the core of this intention aligns well with a polarity of inflow, but the phrases "for the highest good of all" and "...into the lives of everyone who holds this intention" align better with a polarity of outflow.

Now, a key principle for the Law of Attraction to work optimally as explained by Steve is that we should not mix polarities in a single intention, so how do you explain this apparent contradiction in the 1-million USD experiment?

Acting Like Godot · 08-28-2008, 09:17 AM

The explanation is that the polarity concept is ambiguous and useless. LOA works fine without it.

AlanFurth · 08-28-2008, 10:52 AM

Thanks Godot...

is there anyone more favorable of the concept of Polarization that finds the way in which this intention is phrased contradictory?

AlanFurth · 08-28-2008, 10:52 PM

This could be an answer to this issue:

I Disagree With Steve Pavlina About Polarity

AlanFurth · 08-28-2008, 10:57 PM

Here could be an answer to this:

I Disagree With Steve Pavlina About Polarity

Lauxa · 08-30-2008, 01:18 PM

The reason this isn't contradictory is that polarity isn't about a single intention, it's an all-inclusive way of being. If you intend to receive $1M for personal gain vs. if you intend to receive $1M for the highest good of all can be decided based on what polarity you wish to align with.

I don't use polarity myself.

08-27-2008, 01:11 PM	#1 (permalink)
AlanFurth Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 12	1 million USD experiment - contradiction? Hi all, I am a bit puzzled about how the intention of the 1-million USD experiment is phrased, as it seems to have an internal contradiction in terms of polarity. The intention is phrased this way: In an easy and relaxed manner, In a healthy and positive way, In its own perfect time, For the highest good of all, I intend 1,000,000 USD to come into my life, And into the lives of everyone who holds this intention The problem is that there the core of this intention aligns well with a polarity of inflow, but the phrases "for the highest good of all" and "...into the lives of everyone who holds this intention" align better with a polarity of outflow. Now, a key principle for the Law of Attraction to work optimally as explained by Steve is that we should not mix polarities in a single intention, so how do you explain this apparent contradiction in the 1-million USD experiment?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Million Dollar Experiment	pianoperformer	Intention-Manifestation	3	05-23-2008 06:52 AM
Million ($1,000,000) Dollar Experiment	rsinghal2000	Business & Financial	4	02-22-2008 09:41 PM
Million Dollar Experiment	Kosmos	Intention-Manifestation	2	09-04-2007 09:05 PM
Million Dollar Experiment	jtrikster	Intention-Manifestation	8	07-15-2007 02:05 AM
Million Dollar Experiment Manifests $4 Million (Blog)	Savage	Steve Pavlina	13	03-08-2007 04:36 PM

08-28-2008, 09:17 AM	#2 (permalink)
Acting Like Godot Banned Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 9,613	The explanation is that the polarity concept is ambiguous and useless. LOA works fine without it.

08-28-2008, 10:52 AM	#3 (permalink)
AlanFurth Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 12	Thanks Godot... is there anyone more favorable of the concept of Polarization that finds the way in which this intention is phrased contradictory?

08-28-2008, 10:52 PM	#4 (permalink)
AlanFurth Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 12	This could be an answer to this issue: I Disagree With Steve Pavlina About Polarity

08-28-2008, 10:57 PM	#5 (permalink)
AlanFurth Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 12	Here could be an answer to this: I Disagree With Steve Pavlina About Polarity

08-30-2008, 01:18 PM	#6 (permalink)
Lauxa Family Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 2,545	The reason this isn't contradictory is that polarity isn't about a single intention, it's an all-inclusive way of being. If you intend to receive $1M for personal gain vs. if you intend to receive $1M for the highest good of all can be decided based on what polarity you wish to align with. I don't use polarity myself.

Personal Development for Smart PeopleTM Forums

Personal Development for Smart People^TM Forums