Negative Intention Manifestation

[Pyper900]

It strikes me that IM can be used in a manner of scapegoat-ism.

Reading the thread on the IM effect on the Hallocaust, brought to mind that applying the idea of IM to the events of world war II amount to letting the actions of people be attributed to cosmic powers beyond their control.

This idea may work when considering the larger picture, when looking at the overall course of the war; but when you consider the smaller details the whole thing seems to fall apart.

When you think about IM, or willing certain events or conditions, whether consciously or subconsciously, to happen in your favour, or not in the favour of others, there is a certain conflct that arrises in the logic.

The act of IM requires a choice and a direction, which is a direct proponent of free will. You require the ability to choose among many different paths of causality in order to affect the outcome of events through action or intention.

However, the fruition of IM on events, whether in your own favour in not in the favour of others, demands a suspention of the other party's free will (and there's always another party). In order to affect the outcome of the events in any way other than naturally random, 'fate' (as I have no other word to use for the concept of outcome) must be tipped in one favour or another, simultaneously providing more options to one party, while limiting or removing options for the other.

If this is the case, then IM is effectively manipulating free will, which in and of itself is a paradox. If IM requires free will to operate, and it in effect limits or suspends free will in operation, it cannot be possible.

Please explore this.

[cylon]

Subjective Reality can help in explaining this. SR says there is one consciousness. Which would mean you (or I) create all those horrible things.

[Pyper900]

Originally Posted by cylon

Subjective Reality can help in explaining this. SR says there is one consciousness. Which would mean you (or I) create all those horrible things.

Subjective Reality (or wave theory) doesn't explain this, it simply adds another dimension to the problem. Unless you are speaking of exclusive reality, in which we are each inhabbiting our own universe, though, in that case, IM would sort of be irrelevant, since the entire construct is unique to the experiencer's perspective.

[cylon]

Ok.

[Angela]

@cylon:

[Wax Frog]

Originally Posted by Angela

@cylon:

With pure loving in her soul, as she types up crytic notes...
You can say she's satisfi-i-ied... Angie...

[Pyper900]

And this is on topic...how?

[Wax Frog]

Originally Posted by Pyper900

And this is on topic...how?

They do allow a bit of wiggle room here. Sorry if I offended.

[drama07]

Originally Posted by Pyper900

And this is on topic...how?

It is an inside joke, i believe

[Pyper900]

Originally Posted by Wax Frog

They do allow a bit of wiggle room here. Sorry if I offended.

My limited experience here tells me that the wiggle room provided by Angela is subjective at best.

[Angela]

EVERYTHING provided by me is subjective at best.

[cylon]

Originally Posted by Angela

EVERYTHING provided by me is subjective at best.

I don't really see it that way.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by cylon

I don't really see it that way.

No? How do you see it?

(Pyper900, this will relate back to your OP, you'll see...)

[cylon]

I was actually kidding, doing a riff on "everything is subjective".

But the OP doesn't see that as a valid line of reasoning.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Pyper900

In order to affect the outcome of the events in any way other than naturally random, 'fate' (as I have no other word to use for the concept of outcome) must be tipped in one favour or another, simultaneously providing more options to one party, while limiting or removing options for the other.

Not really ....

You're thinking in terms of a zero-sum game, where:

(1) one person's gain is necessarily someone else's loss; amd
(2) what the gainer gains is exactly the loser loses.

But it doesn't work like that.

Eg X wants friendship. Y wants friendship. They attract each other and become friends. Both gain, and neither loses.

Even apparent zero-sum games are arguably not. It depends on what each participant creates for himself, out of the experience. Eg 10 people compete in a race. All want to win the gold medal. Only one does - that's the rule which all 10 people accepted, when they chose to participate.

But the subjective experience of the race - everyone takes his gain/loss in his own way.

Eg one person may be very happy with his experience, even though he won nothing (eg he's happy to participate, because it's fun to him). Another person may have learned something valuable about competitive racing, from the experience. For a 3rd person, this race may be an important training build-up for what, to him, is a more important race two months away.

[Pyper900]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

Not really ....

You're thinking in terms of a zero-sum game, where:

(1) one person's gain is necessarily someone else's loss; amd
(2) what the gainer gains is exactly the loser loses.

But it doesn't work like that.

Eg X wants friendship. Y wants friendship. They attract each other and become friends. Both gain, and neither loses.

Even apparent zero-sum games are arguably not. It depends on what each participant creates for himself, out of the experience. Eg 10 people compete in a race. All want to win the gold medal. Only one does - that's the rule which all 10 people accepted, when they chose to participate.

But the subjective experience of the race - everyone takes his gain/loss in his own way.

Eg one person may be very happy with his experience, even though he won nothing (eg he's happy to participate, because it's fun to him). Another person may have learned something valuable about competitive racing, from the experience. For a 3rd person, this race may be an important training build-up for what, to him, is a more important race two months away.

You're right, that is how I view things, not necessarily black and white, but in the end there is a zero-sum reduceability to existence.

In your analogy of the racers, while each participant may have varying goals, and certainly more than one goal per individual, my posit holds true. Regardless of each participants satisfaction with their relative consolation position, the result of one person actually winning the race, is that all others are eliminated from that option. All things being equal in the race dynamics, each participant had/has an equal chance of winning, that chance is of course affected my many different variables, but adding IM into the equation is either negligible or impossible.

Remember the basic laws of physics, which still apply to metaphysics; every action has an equal and opposite reaction. If the action of my manifest intention involves gaining options or choices, it must mean that the opposite reaction is for someone else to lose options or choices. There doesn't seem to be a way around it.

[joelr]

Originally Posted by Pyper900

Remember the basic laws of physics, which still apply to metaphysics; every action has an equal and opposite reaction. If the action of my manifest intention involves gaining options or choices, it must mean that the opposite reaction is for someone else to lose options or choices. There doesn't seem to be a way around it.

The many-worlds interpretation should fix that to a large degree. Do you follow?

[Pyper900]

Originally Posted by joelr

The many-worlds interpretation should fix that to a large degree. Do you follow?

I suppose it would...

Until the box is opened, there is either a dead cat, a live cat, or nothing at all inside. The act of opening the box manifests the outcome.

Interesting.

What you're suggesting is that each option is ever-present and the intention manifests by bringing your personally favourable (or unintentionally desired) outcome to bear in this "world".

That is a bit of a leap though, as the many worlds hypothesis doesn't hold up well under occam's razor.

[Angela]

You know, Pyper900, conscious desire isn't what has physical manifestations showing up. It's part of it, sure, but even more important is vibrational alignment.

Four racers all want to win the race, consciously:

Alice believes she will win, and is feeling really, really good about how powerful, nourished, and vital her body feels, and is really enjoying the prospect of the competition. If for some reason she doesn't place first, a thought she's not even entertaining, she would look for feedback and use it in the next race.

Brunhilda believes she can win, and feels pretty good about winning, but she's a bit worried that her recent shoulder injury will slow her down.

Carlotta is absolutely committed to winning, because she feels like her parents will be so disappointed if she even comes in second. She feels very confident, but also apprehensive because she knows she'll be mortified if things don't go the way she wants them to. She's also slightly pissed off at her mom and dad for putting her in this position.

Dottie is excited to be entering her first race. She's proud of herself to have made it through the first heats, and delighted to be here. She sees Alice, Brunhilda, and Carlotta as far more athletic and experienced than herself, and hopes for a miraculous first place win.

Each of our racers is vibrating perfectly for the results she gets. Each consciously wants the win, and at the same time, unconscious focus and commitment will influence her outcome in the race. The women who don't come in first have "lost" the race, but they haven't really lost anything -- in fact, they've gained the perfect result that they were vibrationally aligned for. If they are alert, then can take the feedback of their results and boldly look at what they would have to adjust so that their conscious and unconscious desires are headed in the same direction: towards the gold medal. (or maybe, in Carlotta's case, to quit racing and focus on what she really wants in life.)

Whoever wins first place doesn't take anything away from the others, although it may look that way to the untrained eye.

[Pyper900]

Originally Posted by Angela

You know, Pyper900, conscious desire isn't what has physical manifestations showing up. It's part of it, sure, but even more important is vibrational alignment.

Four racers all want to win the race, consciously:

Alice believes she will win, and is feeling really, really good about how powerful, nourished, and vital her body feels, and is really enjoying the prospect of the competition. If for some reason she doesn't place first, a thought she's not even entertaining, she would look for feedback and use it in the next race.

Brunhilda believes she can win, and feels pretty good about winning, but she's a bit worried that her recent shoulder injury will slow her down.

Carlotta is absolutely committed to winning, because she feels like her parents will be so disappointed if she even comes in second. She feels very confident, but also apprehensive because she knows she'll be mortified if things don't go the way she wants them to. She's also slightly pissed off at her mom and dad for putting her in this position.

Dottie is excited to be entering her first race. She's proud of herself to have made it through the first heats, and delighted to be here. She sees Alice, Brunhilda, and Carlotta as far more athletic and experienced than herself, and hopes for a miraculous first place win.

Each of our racers is vibrating perfectly for the results she gets. Each consciously wants the win, and at the same time, unconscious focus and commitment will influence her outcome in the race. The women who don't come in first have "lost" the race, but they haven't really lost anything -- in fact, they've gained the perfect result that they were vibrationally aligned for. If they are alert, then can take the feedback of their results and boldly look at what they would have to adjust so that their conscious and unconscious desires are headed in the same direction: towards the gold medal.

Whoever wins first place doesn't take anything away from the others, although it may look that way to the untrained eye.

I agree, the many variables of the race, environmental conditions, training, nutrition, motivation, etc, etc, ad nauseum, will all contribute to the outcome. Intention, in the very literal and corporeal sense, would also play a part, possibly a significant one.

But this is opening the argument up to a separate issue. For example, if I desire money, I have options available to me for gaining it. IM would suggest that visualzing my intention will have some significant impact on my acheivment of that goal, when in fact, it changes nothing of the availability of and/or accessibility of the options that were available at the outset.

The act of visualising acheivment may assist in choosing the correct path, but this is not what started the discussion. To suggest that IM can have an appreciable impact on the outcome of a war suggests a mystical or metaphysical influence exerted by my intention, that is independent of my physical effort.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Pyper900

But this is opening the argument up to a separate issue. For example, if I desire money, I have options available to me for gaining it. IM would suggest that visualzing my intention will have some significant impact on my acheivment of that goal, when in fact, it changes nothing of the availability of and/or accessibility of the options that were available at the outset.

That is so and not so. Many of us who deliberately use I/M would agree with you, I think -- your thoughts don't change the availability of the money you want, because it is available to you in infinite abundance, regardless of your visualizing or not visualizing -- but they do affect your access to it. Your ability to access infinite abundance is definitely affected by your belief that it's there in the first place (or not) and your other thoughts (like: "rich people are schmucks" or "I don't deserve it" or "money is the root of all evil.") That's true whether you're deliberately using I/M or not.

Visualizing, by the way, is only a part of intention manifestation, and not even an essential part.

The act of visualising acheivment may assist in choosing the correct path, but this is not what started the discussion. To suggest that IM can have an appreciable impact on the outcome of a war suggests a mystical or metaphysical influence exerted by my intention, that is independent of my physical effort.

I'm not sure what you mean by mystical or metaphysical, but I suspect you mean a force external to myself, right? Like a personal god or other external life force? I don't believe that there is any external force involved. It's all me. Well, really, it's all YOU. Same thing.

[Pyper900]

Originally Posted by Angela

That is so and not so. Many of us who deliberately use I/M would agree with you, I think -- your thoughts don't change the availability of the money you want, because it is available to you in infinite abundance, regardless of your visualizing or not visualizing -- but they do affect your access to it. Your ability to access infinite abundance is definitely affected by your belief that it's there in the first place (or not) and your other thoughts (like: "rich people are schmucks" or "I don't deserve it" or "money is the root of all evil.") That's true whether you're deliberately using I/M or not.

Visualizing, by the way, is only a part of intention manifestation, and not even an essential part.



I'm not sure what you mean by mystical or metaphysical, but I suspect you mean a force external to myself, right? Like a personal god or other external life force? I don't believe that there is any external force involved. It's all me. Well, really, it's all YOU. Same thing.

Are you suggesting that IM is an additional dimention to my physical effort?

Is this statement true or false? I desire an apple, I can manifest the apple in two ways, by going to the kitchen and getting one, or by using inention to manifest the sensation of eating the apple, complete with taste and hunger satisfaction.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Pyper900

Are you suggesting that IM is an additional dimention to my physical effort?

No, I wasn't suggesting that, but you could look at it that way, if you want. I/M and physical effort are both dimensions of the human game. Personally, I suspect that all physical action arises out of intention, conscious or unconscious.

[Pyper900]

Originally Posted by Angela

No, I wasn't suggesting that, but you could look at it that way, if you want. I/M and physical effort are both dimensions of the human game. Personally, I suspect that all physical action arises out of intention, conscious or unconscious.

Sorry, I added a late edit to my last post, could you comment on that?

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Pyper900

Is this statement true or false? I desire an apple, I can manifest the apple in two ways, by going to the kitchen and getting one, or by using inention to manifest the sensation of eating the apple, complete with taste and hunger satisfaction.

True, depending on what you're vibrationally aligned for. And your most effective choice will depend on what you consciously desire.

For instance: let's say I'm hungry and I want an apple to nourish me. That thought feels good, so I'm going to the frig to get an apple. (I actually did just go eat an apple out of my frig, and an eggwhite, too, while I was at it.) You said apple and manifested the image of an apple in my head (good on, you!) and I followed that image to my frig and ate one, in physical reality.

And let's say you had done that while I was at the beach. You conjure the image of the apple in my head by communicating it to me, and I want the sensation of taste and hunger satisfaction, but I'm currently unwilling to go in from my comfy spot and actually eat an apple. So, instead I choose to generate the sensory experience of tasting an apple (Fuji, please, thanks) and feeling it go down my gullet and fill up my stomach, yum, done. That works, too. (In my experience, generating that sensory experience tends to create physical-world-manifestations, like the fruit guy might walk by just at that moment, or Danger Man might wander out with a Fuji and an eggwhite, which he knows I love. Things like that happen all the time in my life.)

[Pyper900]

Originally Posted by Angela

True, depending on what you're vibrationally aligned for. And your most effective choice will depend on what you consciously desire.

For instance: let's say I'm hungry and I want an apple to nourish me. That thought feels good, so I'm going to the frig to get an apple. (I actually did just go eat an apple out of my frig, and an eggwhite, too, while I was at it.) You said apple and manifested the image of an apple in my head (good on, you!) and I followed that image to my frig and ate one, in physical reality.

And let's say you had done that while I was at the beach. You conjure the image of the apple in my head by communicating it to me, and I want the sensation of taste and hunger satisfaction, but I'm currently unwilling to go in from my comfy spot and actually eat an apple. So, instead I choose to generate the sensory experience of tasting an apple (Fuji, please, thanks) and feeling it go down my gullet and fill up my stomach, yum, done. That works, too. (In my experience, generating that sensory experience tends to create physical-world-manifestations, like the fruit guy might walk by just at that moment, or Danger Man might wander out with a Fuji and an eggwhite, which he knows I love. Things like that happen all the time in my life.)

Ok, it was the latter example which formed the basis of my understanding in IM, and wanted to confirm that we're talking about the same thing.

So, in your assesment, is the latter example pointing to a manipulation of choices on the part of say, the fruit guy or "Danger Man" (wtf?), or, is it simply a matter of aligning priorities in...the universe (for lack of a better term)?

Meaning, "Danger Man" was faced with the option of heading to you with an apple all along, but your intention manifestation simply pushed him in that direction, as opposed to another.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Pyper900

So, in your assesment, is the latter example pointing to a manipulation of choices on the part of say, the fruit guy or "Danger Man" (wtf?), or, is it simply a matter of aligning priorities in...the universe (for lack of a better term)?

The way I look at it, Fruit Guy or Danger Man (my sweetheart; sorry, I forgot you haven't been around long enough to know that) are busy making their own conscious and unconscious choices and having their own experiences. At the same time, they're both a part of Who I Am, and Who I Am (some people might call that "the universe") is constantly flowing in response to the vibrational alignment of every aspect of it. (of me.)

Neither Fruit Guy nor Danger Man is caving to my dictatorial desires; they are both being exactly who they are and making exactly the right choices for themselves, and their choices are exactly right for me, too, whether I get my apple from them or not. I didn't push anyone, but my thoughts and vibration may have influenced the vibrational flow.

This sounds a bit more whooo-whoooo than I normally prefer to sound. But please know that I'm not talking about any supernatural external force.

[Pyper900]

Originally Posted by Angela

The way I look at it, Fruit Guy or Danger Man (my sweetheart; sorry, I forgot you haven't been around long enough to know that) are busy making their own conscious and unconscious choices and having their own experiences. At the same time, they're both a part of Who I Am, and Who I Am (some people might call that "the universe") is constantly flowing in response to the vibrational alignment of every aspect of it. (of me.)

Neither Fruit Guy nor Danger Man is caving to my dictatorial desires; they are both being exactly who they are and making exactly the right choices for themselves, and their choices are exactly right for me, too, whether I get my apple from them or not. I didn't push anyone, but my thoughts and vibration may have influenced the vibrational flow.

This sounds a bit more whooo-whoooo than I normally prefer to sound. But please know that I'm not talking about any supernatural external force.

I accept that, and applaude you for avoiding my word trap.

[Angela]

I didn't notice a trap had been set. I was just floating along blithely, answering your questions of me! Phewww, I'm so glad I survived!

[Pyper900]

Originally Posted by Angela

I didn't notice a trap had been set. I was just floating along blithely, answering your questions of me! Phewww, I'm so glad I survived!

Hehe, had you answered that your intention was in any way affecting the choices of Danger Man, I would have pounced. As it is, I'll retreat and wait for another opportunity to catch intellectual prey!