Manifestation Experiment - Easy Way to Learn About LOA

[Daffy Duck]

Oh yes, I would be very satisfied if people figured out how to fly (like Superman). That would be very exciting, probably one of the most exciting things ever.

In our lifetime? Within 100 years? Well, I'd be pleasantly surprised.

[joelr]

Yeah it's very possible. When quantum mechanics came about in the 1920s it allowed for a HUGE wave of technological inventions over the following 80 years.
If some new Einstein shows up and figures out gravity it could allow for a person to simply wear a device to cancel gravity to some degree while increasing velocity some other way, well, the details are not important,
Just that it could happen depending on the nature of whatever gravity really is.

[Cantando]

Originally Posted by Angela

I'm fine with believing in gravity. It works well for me in my human game.

Gravity works whether one believes in it or not.

If you let go of a stone in your hand, do you, or the stone for that matter, have to believe in gravity for it to fall to the ground?

That is what I've been trying to say throughout this thread. Yes, it is possible to fly. Science just needs to gain a deeper understanding of how energy works. Once, we have cracked it, we will all be flying around like Superman.

If you switch on an electric light, do you have to believe first that the light will come on? No, because science has already solved the problem. Belief doesn't come into it.

[Daffy Duck]

Cantando, hehehe, I think I've made the same exact point, among many other people who have said similar things. These discussions have their place but ultimately what I think is best is to focus on actions and results. Whether we believe in ALG's version of LOA, or Angela's version, or Leo's version, or no version at all... I decided the most important thing is to look at people with their actions.

Actions have always spoken louder than words to me. If someone tells me they believe they can fly, but I see them walking and driving everywhere, then I know what they really believe, no matter what they say. This applies to myself as well.

Note: Saying you believe you can do something and saying you believe something is possible are two different things. I believe climbing Mt. Everest is possible, but I currently can't do it (and don't want to).

And just for fun: Global Consciousness Project

[Lil Chris]

Aren't beliefs and understanding in the same realm...?

Do you believe something because you understand it or do you understand something because you believe it...?

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Daffy Duck

When I say that 99.999% of people can't fly, it is strongly implied that I mean flying like Superman does.

When I see those guys in their wingsuits, it looks very much to me like Superman style flying. If it's not exactly what you were talking about (flying on one's own steam, so to speak), it seems pretty close to me -- I don't think the comparison of your asking for a train and my showing you a car is a fair one. But -- I'm sorry that I wasted your time. I did not intend to do that.

You are excited by the idea of flying (like superman) and so am I. I think the wingsuits are an inspiring way of flying, and even to someone who won't be satisfied unless there is no "external" apparatus or help involved, it seems to me that this is a rather amazing and cool creation that some people have manifested into reality -- something that would absolutely dumbfound people living 100 years ago. Technology is advancing so quickly, I wouldn't be surprised at all if it gets even more supermanly before you're too old and rickety to participate.

And even superman used an external source -- solar radiation -- to charge up.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Cantando

Gravity works whether one believes in it or not.

Yes, that's what people say about the law of attraction, too. It works whether you believe in it or not.

[joelr]

Originally Posted by Cantando

Gravity works whether one believes in it or not.

If you let go of a stone in your hand, do you, or the stone for that matter, have to believe in gravity for it to fall to the ground?

That is what I've been trying to say throughout this thread. Yes, it is possible to fly. Science just needs to gain a deeper understanding of how energy works. Once, we have cracked it, we will all be flying around like Superman.

If you switch on an electric light, do you have to believe first that the light will come on? No, because science has already solved the problem. Belief doesn't come into it.

What hinges on belief are the EXPERIENCES one has. I don't know if anyone can manifest themselves into a reality where a fundamental force is altered. But there are likely realities where gravity has been resolved and others where it has not. Someone who thinks often on flying may find themselves in such a reality.

[Cantando]

Originally Posted by Angela

Yes, that's what people say about the law of attraction, too. It works whether you believe in it or not.

How does it work?

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Cantando

How does it work?

I guess you missed my ice cream metaphor.

[Cantando]

Originally Posted by joelr

What hinges on belief are the EXPERIENCES one has. I don't know if anyone can manifest themselves into a reality where a fundamental force is altered. But there are likely realities where gravity has been resolved and others where it has not. Someone who thinks often on flying may find themselves in such a reality.

I do, every night, in my dreams.

[joelr]

Originally Posted by Cantando

How does it work?

A theoretical model can be given based on physics, specifically the Copenhagen Interpretation, Many-Worlds and W. Tillers recent experimental results on subtle energies and consciousness, which I think stands as a MORE LIKELY interpretation of reality than a model based on philosophy (positivism) which critics of LOA often seem to use.

[Cantando]

Originally Posted by Daffy Duck

Note: Saying you believe you can do something and saying you believe something is possible are two different things.

Not according to LoA. If you believe in LoA, then you believe you create the whole of reality within your consciousness.

So, if you believe you can fly, you just do it. This may work in the subjective reality of your dreams or imagination. But, it doesn't work in objective reality, which true LoA/SR believers deny the existence of.

[Daffy Duck]

Originally Posted by Cantando

If you believe in LoA, then you believe you create the whole of reality within your consciousness.

So according to LoA, isn't it possible I could create a whole reality where other people besides myself are capable of flying?

Originally Posted by Angela

I'm sorry that I wasted your time.

No sweat. I have an infinite amount of it.

[joelr]

Originally Posted by Cantando

I do, every night, in my dreams.

Yes, I can't seem to get off the ground lately in my dreamworld.

This subjective reality version of LOA you are speaking of here is more like a misinterpretation of the ideas. No one creates a whole reality. It's really just likely a simple law of (a new field of study concerning the interaction of the physical reality and consciousness). Consciousness is likely a trans-physical phenomenon.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Cantando

But, it doesn't work in objective reality, which true LoA/SR believers deny the existence of.

I don't know who these "true LoA/SR believers" are, but I've never come across anyone who says objective reality does not exist. Who denies the existence of objective reality? Steve Pavlina, for instance, has indicated his perspective that objective reality exists within subjective reality.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Cantando

If you believe in LoA, then you believe you create the whole of reality within your consciousness.

I don't think that's so. Plenty of people believe in the law of attraction, but don't believe in subjective reality, or that our consciousness wholly creates our reality.

[newmark]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

That's incorrect. Steve discussed this in a recent post.

Events, Perception, Truth, and Subjective Reality

In the context of me knowing you, this could be said to be an "event". Next, read Steve's post about events.

I'd set out in greater detail here, but Steve's writing, you see, is quite elegant and clear, so just reading his post would be fine.

LOL. Because Steve said it, does not mean it has to be true. And, in fact, it isn't.
Subjective reality is one viewpoint, no more.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Cantando

OK, how about all the things that are around you right now? I haven't a clue what they are. I am not conscious of them. But there are things around you, right now. Isn't there?

Aha. Remember Freud's iceberg model of human consciousness? It tells you that your mind is composed of:

(1) the conscious
(2) the subconscious
(3) the unconscious

Now, if you read Freud far enough, you'll see that he also posits the idea of a superconscious, that lies beyond the unconscious (that is, even further down the iceberg). This is a collective "shared" mind of the human race. You are part of it, I am part of it, and because it transcends time, even people of the future and of the past are a part of it.

Although Freud was a psychologist and not an occultist or paranormal investigator, his idea of a superconscious mind actually explains very neatly lots of occult and paranormal investigator.

For example, the reason why a psychic might be able to read your mind is that her mind and yours are actually connected, via the superconscious. The only difference between her and you is that the information can actually flow up to the conscious mind, whereas for you it's still deep, deep down in the iceberg (although it may float up into your unconscious or subconscious, when you dream).

Now, if you accept the existence of the superconscious mind, then you see, the real questions are -

What is "your" mind? Where does it end?

And maybe the answer is - it simply doesn't. It goes on and on, is everywhere at all times (Deepak Chopra), is interconnected with all there is (Gautama Buddha), creates all of reality with its thoughts (Seth), and the sum total of all that mind is simply God (Jainism).

It's just that you are conscious of it, only to the extent that information, messages, perceptions etc enter your conscious mind.

In that sense, you have also created the things around me, only that your conscious mind (that small little tip of the iceberg) doesn't realise it. It is not terribly surprising, since your conscious mind can only hold about 7 or 8 bits of data at any given time (that's why telephone numbers are usually about that long).

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by newmark

Subjective reality is one viewpoint, no more.

You see, "objective reality" is also a viewpoint. This is the thing that many people don't realise.

You don't have to focus on esoteric mind theories to understand this. Simply pick any aspect of your ordinary reality that you're reasonably familiar with, and start by asking yourself - "What is objectively true about this?" and you will see what I mean.

You could pick law, economics, accountancy, politics, religion, stock markets, government policy, gardening techniques, advice on how to raise a child, whatever .... And keep asking yourself - "What is objectively true about this?" and you see how rapidly the reasoning breaks down. Inevitably, you'll find the top experts disagreeing somewhere, and wow, it looks like a clash of subjectivities again.

The same thing goes for science, the most "objective" discipline of all. Break it down, and ask yourself what is "objectively true" about this. Whatever area of science you look at it, if you break it down sufficiently, it has got to do with molecules, atoms, subatomic particles ..... and then you get to the collapse of the wavefunction. And then all those theories in quantum physics come in - Bohm's interpretation, the CCC theory, the Many Worlds theory etc etc .....

And the LOA aspect comes to the fore again. It comes in different ways - eg Many Worlds theory doesn't suggest that thoughts create reality, but it does indicate that we exist in parallel dimensions, alternate realities etc etc .... And you see, it just makes all your ordinary notions of an "objective reality" collapse.

[StAnselm]

We can't all create our own separate objective worlds. They wouldn't match up. Because they do match, reality is objective.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by StAnselm

We can't all create our own separate objective worlds. They wouldn't match up. Because they do match, reality is objective.

The first thing is - you're right. Our worlds frequently do not match up. Reality is indeed full of mismatches. People disagree; have different opinions; make different kinds of decisions even when they are in highly similar situations; vote differently, whether for their company chairman or the President or the next American Idol etc etc,

And lots of people can believe that they are being fair, objective, unbiased etc and yet arrive at quite different conclusions on the exact same matter. People can be at the same place and time doing the same thinig, yet feel very differently about that experience.

So all that points to subjective reality, yes.

And what about the times when reality does match? What about the times when we "objectively" agree on a certain result?

Generally, there is nothing truly "objective" about those situations either. It is merely that a group of people have agreed to adhere to a subjectively agreed set of methods to evaluate or measure a certain outcome. The same group could agree to change those standards tomorrow. Or another group of people might choose to use those standards, to measure the same kind of outcome. Etc etc

[StAnselm]

Ok, we are just talking about social conventions and opinions.

I thought that people were saying that nothing was objective.

[Daffy Duck]

Originally Posted by StAnselm

I thought that people were saying that nothing was objective.

Some people do, and it's always ironic, because they state it like it's an objective fact.

[Cantando]

Originally Posted by Angela

I don't think that's so. Plenty of people believe in the law of attraction, but don't believe in subjective reality, or that our consciousness wholly creates our reality.

Angela, Daffy, ALG, et alii, I've given the subject some thought and this is my current take on it.

I'm not trying to score points or prove anyone wrong. I am trying to gain a deeper understanding of reality, and I am only inviting others to do the same - by asking questions of themselves, and not just blindly following some new age fad that comes along, because it sounds cool.

If there are no true LoA believers, then are there fake LoA believers, perhaps, i.e. those who superficially go along with it and chatter about synchros and manifesting blue feathers; those, who when asked a tricky question, say, 'Oh, read Steve's article, he can explain it a lot better than I can', when they, themselves, haven't the foggiest what Steve is on about?

Even ALG lamented that sad fact with regard to this forum, and he got his knuckles rapped for it by the LoA fairy, thought police.

If I wish for a better job and the next day, I am offered a better job, does that prove LoA works? There could be any number of reasons why I was offered the job. If you believe it was definitely LoA, and nothing else (even though you can offer no proof), then that, to me, reflects a blinkered, limited view, a view that excludes any other possibilities.

Next, how can some people equate LoA with a scientific law like the law of gravity?

A scientific law has a single, precise definition which can be consistently proven, over and over again, under a given set of conditions.

LoA is not a law.

There are as many definitions and opinions about it as there are people.

ALG has a whole cart-load of them (one for every occasion).

Can you demonstrate a test for LoA which is measurable, verifiable and which produces the same results over and over again, as one can with the law of gravity? I seriously doubt it, given that LoA is a subjective concept and therefore, by default, cannot be proven in objective reality.

If you follow SR, then, at night time, you believe the sun does not exist, since you do not see it or experience it, i.e. it is not within your consciousness.

However, where I am, it may be daytime, and I can see the sun quite plainly.

If you follow SR, then you believe there is only one consciousness that contains the whole of reality. So, how can the sun both exist and not exist within consciousness? It's either there or it isn't. You can't have it both ways. So, there is an innate flaw here.

You may then justify your SR model by saying, yes, there is only one consciousness which contains one reality, but there are also individual consciousnessess within consciousness, each with it's own unique perspective of reality.

Interesting.

Doesn't that model sound suspiciously like the traditional creator God one?

God (the one consciousness) created all universes (reality). God created us in his own image and likeness (offshoots/projections of consciousness) each with our own, unique selves (souls). We are eternal, spiritual beings (being creations/projections of God/consciousness).

I can go with that.

[Cantando]

Originally Posted by Angela

I guess you missed my ice cream metaphor.

Thank God I did!

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Cantando

Doesn't that model sound suspiciously like the traditional creator God one?

God (the one consciousness) created all universes (reality). God created us in his own image and likeness (offshoots/projections of consciousness) each with our own, unique selves (souls). We are eternal, spiritual beings (being projections of eternal consciousness).

I can go with that.

Yes, definitely.

So can I.

You now sound a little bit like Ramtha, the non-physical entity channelled by JZ Knight.

You see, one chooses a viewpoint, and from that viewpoint, a model of reality develops. If one chooses another viewpoint, then from that viewpoint, another different model develops. Neither model is necessarily more "correct" or "objective" than the other, you see?

Your own perspective creates the model. You see what you believe. You can keep changing your beliefs, and you'll keep seeing different things.

This applies to the big esoteric questions, and it applies to small mundane things as well. For example, ask a master chef; a farmer; a nutritionist; a botanist and a green grocer to tell you what a tomato means to them. Do not be surprised to receive 5 different descriptions.

That's what I keep telling you. Your thoughts create your reality.

[newmark]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

.... And you see, it just makes all your ordinary notions of an "objective reality" collapse.

I don't believe that there is either a subjective reality or an objective reality. I see it as a continuum. For example do we have free will or is life pre-determined? I would argue that it is both. We have freedom of choice, but we are also constrained by many outside factors.
I don't think any human can be completely objective, but we can be more, or less, objective. That is, we can take on views and factors from outside our own personal reality. Yes, I understand that once we become aware of something then it enters our subjective reality. However, only in some respects. There is always a reality outside our own.
And this outside reality can sometimes impose itself onto our subjective reality. For example in an earthquake, or in the case of one individual using the power of suggestion upon another.

[Acting Like Godot]

There are many interesting points raised within this short paragraph of yours ...

Originally Posted by newmark

I don't believe that there is either a subjective reality or an objective reality. I see it as a continuum. For example do we have free will or is life pre-determined? I would argue that it is both. We have freedom of choice, but we are also constrained by many outside factors.
I don't think any human can be completely objective, but we can be more, or less, objective. That is, we can take on views and factors from outside our own personal reality. Yes, I understand that once we become aware of something then it enters our subjective reality. However, only in some respects. There is always a reality outside our own.
And this outside reality can sometimes impose itself onto our subjective reality. For example in an earthquake, or in the case of one individual using the power of suggestion upon another.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by newmark

For example do we have free will or is life pre-determined? I would argue that it is both. We have freedom of choice, but we are also constrained by many outside factors.

I don't even think that we have freedom of choice. Certainly, not all the time, and not under all circumstances.

You see, we humans are habit-forming creatures. We form habits constantly, ceaselessly, every day. And all habits are simply recurring patterns of thought. Recurring patterns of thought can be very hard to break. But if you cannot break them, then obviously you do not have freedom of choice.

Consider for example, addictions. It could be drugs, sex, cigarettes, alcohol, whatever. In all cases, there is a recurring pattern of thought in the addict, which causes him to repeat his behaviour again and again, even though another part of him may want to quit.

Addictions are an obvious example of recurring patterns of thought. But all of us have many, many different kinds of patterns of thought. At the most fundamental level, we might even say that all those things which the Buddha described as "obscurations" are just recurring patterns of thoughts.

For example, Buddhism says that most of us are under the following illusions:

(1) we perceive our selves as inherently existing;
(2) we perceive that we are separate and distinct from other things in reality;
(3) we perceive things to be much more permanent and stable than they really are

Etc etc.

Now, all of those illusions (1) to (3) could be said to be recurring patterns of thought. They are habits. And if we shed them, we would become enlightened.