The Beginning of the End for The Secret?

[impaul99]

Originally Posted by annie

????

I'm pretty sure you made up that definition. Because I for one believe in the LOA but I absolutely do not believe that LOA REQUIRES the belief that we attract EVERYTHING (your emphasis) into your lives.

This is a better definition:

The Law of Attraction is a theory commonly associated with New Age and New Thought philosophy. It posits that one should never dwell on the negative, as the metaphysical principle of life is embodied in a "law of attraction": "you get what you think about; your thoughts determine your destiny."[1] From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So what criteria is used to determine what we attracted and what we didn't?

[impaul99]

Originally Posted by Antiventurecapital

You need a time out if you don't understand the difference between the Law of Gravity and the Law of Attraction.

Mind explaining it to me then? I understand the Law of Gravity to work whether it's a 50 year old mass murderer jumping off a building or a 5 year old innocent girl. They both hit the ground and die.

I understand the Law of Attraction to work whether it's a 50 year old mass murderer attracting something bad happening to him or a little 5 year old girl.

All I'm trying to equate is the fact that the law itself does't judge when it should turn itself on or off. It's not like gravity sees a little girl jumping off the building and thinks "Oh ************, it would be mean for this little girl to die, so I'll just turn myself off this time."

[annie]

well, as you can see from thousands of posts and threads on this discussion board, people can be pretty confused about that very issue and so many throw out the whole principle because they can't face "the fact" that LOA is responsible for the murder and rape of a child etc.

I'm one of those that absolutely believes in the Law of Attraction, but not as the only source of "outcome". There are other laws in the universe, there are other people's "will" and what they are attracting into their lives with their own thoughts. (and as you may already know...I believe in God's will which probably trumps them all).

As a stupid example.....can I use the law of attraction to fly? (around my room right now?) how does that work with the law of gravity. I don't think LOA stands alone in that you can say we attract EVERYTHING into our own lives....there are definitely other variables.

So in terms of "criteria".... who could possibly know.

I am only stating again what many others have already said. We really do love the idea of LOA, but to make a claim that it is the highest power and principle and stands alone in the universe.....I won't defend it that far, which is why I don't believe that a child could possibly have attracted her own murder and rape.

I have read your answer about a former life etc and I am certainly trying to figure out how that connects with my beliefs.

I'm not sure that I do believe in many many past lives, however, I certainly believe that I was alive before coming into my present body. I have also read many NDE stories that talk about how we "choose" certain experiences in our current life. I actually do believe that....it completely resonated with me.

So....if I believe that there are "no accidents" and I believe that I could have chosen my lifes experiences pre-birth....technically do I believe what you do and we're splitting hairs here?

(I really do believe that my strong believe in a loving God plays into this a lot)

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Antiventurecapital

It's news to me that LoA requires a belief in reincarnation and karma.

Or is this your personal spin on it?

A common misunderstanding is that karma is about past lives. No. That's only part of it. Karma simply is the universal principle that your intentions (and your intentional deeds) attract corresponding consequences into your life. All your intentions will attract some kind of corresponding consequence.

You don't have to wait till your next life, to experience those consequences. You could jolly well experience tomorrow, the karmic consequences of an intention expressed today, or an intentional deed performed today. The consequences of your intentions and acts are occurring all the time.

At the point of death, whatever karmic consequences of your past acts and intentions that haven't manifested yet, will simply be carried over to your next life.

The Dalai Lama has further explained that there are different levels of karmic consequences. A strong intention swiftly followed by a purposeful, deliberate act, attracts strong karmic consequences. A weak intention that is not followed up by any actual deed, attracts weaker karmic consequences. An accidental deed, done with no intention, attracts no karmic consequences. To understand the above, you may wish to consider the following scenarios:

1. You hate cats. You express the intention to kill a cat. Indeed you do deliberately kill a cat by catching it and stabbing it with a knife.

2. You dislike cats. One day, you intentionally kick a cat. But you would never go so far as to deliberately kill one.

3. You do not hate cats at all. One day you accidentally kick into one.

The karmic consequences will vary. In Scenario 3, you attract no karmic consequences for hurting the cat, for it was unintentional.

Now, how does LOA (or the versions that the Steve Pavlinas of the world like to talk about) come in? Well, basically they're manipulating karma. We already know that all our intentions have karmic consequences. What are intentions? Intentions are thoughts.

Therefore we will deliberately & carefully choose our thoughts, and plant them into the universe, to attract the kind of consequences, events and circumstances that we want. In fact, we seek to plant our thoughts with maximum karmic efficiency. That's why we use all the LOA/IM techniques:

thinking with strong emotion;
visualisation;
positive affirmation (repeating the same thought again and again)
getting into a deep mental state, before planting our thoughts
removing conflicting beliefs (thoughts)

Etc etc.

[Antiventurecapital]

Originally Posted by impaul99

Mind explaining it to me then? I understand the Law of Gravity to work whether it's a 50 year old mass murderer jumping off a building or a 5 year old innocent girl. They both hit the ground and die.

I understand the Law of Attraction to work whether it's a 50 year old mass murderer attracting something bad happening to him or a little 5 year old girl.

All I'm trying to equate is the fact that the law itself does't judge when it should turn itself on or off. It's not like gravity sees a little girl jumping off the building and thinks "Oh ************, it would be mean for this little girl to die, so I'll just turn myself off this time."

Since you need to ask:

Law of Gravity:

You, or anyone else for that matter, can jump off a 5 storey building and the result will be the same every time: a big messy splat on the sidewalk. The result will never vary. Never.

Law of Attraction:

You can ask any random group of people to apply the so-called LoA in their lives and the results will always be inconclusive. The ones who are "better" at it will manifest maybe 60% of their goals. The ones who are not so good will maybe manifest 40%. When the average success rate is crunched the result will be in the nice inconclusive 45% to 55% range.

Obviously, I have pulled those numbers out of the air since they aren't really that important. What is important is that the results overall for the group will be about 50/50 as it is for people who have never heard of LoA.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Antiventurecapital

It's news to me that LoA requires a belief in reincarnation and karma.

LOA as explained by Abraham-Hicks does involve reincarnation.

[Antiventurecapital]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

LOA as explained by Abraham-Hicks does involve reincarnation.

Look, I hate to be an old school fuddy duddy who insists that people provide proof for outrageous claims, but when it comes to "channelers" I simply can't help myself.

Do you remember how JZ Knight (aka Ramtha) was exposed as a fraud?

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Antiventurecapital

Law of Attraction:

You can ask any random group of people to apply the so-called LoA in their lives and the results will always be inconclusive. The ones who are "better" at it will manifest maybe 60% of their goals. The ones who are not so good will maybe manifest 40%. When the average success rate is crunched the result will be in the nice inconclusive 45% to 55% range.

Obviously, I have pulled those numbers out of the air since they aren't really that important. What is important is that the results overall for the group will be about 50/50 as it is for people who have never heard of LoA.

Actually, this is incorrect.

The success rate for everyone, whether they have heard of LOA or not, is 100%. Each person's life will be a perfect reflection of the sum total of his thoughts.

The 100% figure would hold true, whether you subscribe to the Abraham-Hicks model, or to Steve Pavlina's subjective reality model, or to Buddha's karmic model.

The success rate of the deliberate, conscious application of LOA, is a different story. You think about 50,000 thoughts a day. How many were deliberate & conscious?

[annie]

Acting like Godot....

I liked your explanation of Karma, enlightening anyways. (I had heard of it, but that was a great refresher)

And now you just posted that LOA as explained by A/H does involve reincarnation. WOW. But surely you agree that LOA is a principle based on more than one persons opinion. I'm pretty sure that for instance, Napoleon Hill didn't have a comment on Karma and reincarnation.

Also, in another thread I posted tonight....I stated that LOA was a religion and you disagreed ...and yet I'm quite certain that both Karma & Reincarnation are "religious terms"...at least somewhat.

So where do you stand?

Does LOA "HAVE" to involve karma & reincarnation...like impaul99 claims?
And are you insinuating by using these terms that it has a religious flavor to it?

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Antiventurecapital

Look, I hate to be an old school fuddy duddy who insists that people provide proof for outrageous claims, but when it comes to "channelers" I simply can't help myself.

Do you remember how JZ Knight (aka Ramtha) was exposed as a fraud?

I am not asking you to believe or not believe in Abraham-Hicks. I was merely responding to your point that as far as you were aware, LOA does not involve reincarnation.

Whether or not you believe in LOA, and whether or not you believe in Abraham-Hicks, you cannot get very far into the topic without discussing LOA and Abraham-Hicks. Simply because Abraham-Hicks occupies such a big position in the overall LOA theory.

Abraham-Hicks has a strong link to LOA, and Abraham-Hicks has a clear position on reincarnation; that is how reincarnation gets into the LOA picture.

[Antiventurecapital]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

I am not asking you to believe or not believe in Abraham-Hicks. I was merely responding to your point that as far as you were aware, LOA does not involve reincarnation.

Whether or not you believe in LOA, and whether or not you believe in Abraham-Hicks, you cannot get very far into the topic without discussing LOA and Abraham-Hicks.

Abraham-Hicks has a strong link to LOA, and Abraham-Hicks has a clear position on reincarnation; that is how reincarnation gets into the LOA picture.

Look, here's my take on LoA.

LoA is a game to be played by fully-functioning adults, not children. To win at it you must be "3 for 3" as James Ray puts it. This means that your thoughts, emotions, and actions (<--Klang-klang-klang!!!) must all be in alignment.

To me it's little more than a New Age variation of the "little train that could":

belief in oneself + positive expectations + action = results

Did I emphasize the action part enough?

Hell, you could drop the first two components and still get most things with just the action part.

Where LoA all falls apart for me and most people is when some start to believe they are gods:

I brought the great Tsunami down upon me.
\


I made those jets crash into the WTC.
\


I manifested that earth quake.
\



Yes, of course you did.
\

[impaul99]

Originally Posted by annie

Does LOA "HAVE" to involve karma & reincarnation...like impaul99 claims?
And are you insinuating by using these terms that it has a religious flavor to it?

I would invite you to look at things like reincarnation as "spiritual" as opposed to religious.

My definition of believing in spirituality is that one believes that we are spiritual beings that occupy a human body for our time here on earth but after we biologically die we do NOT cease to exist. If you believe spirit goes on beyond a single human lifetime, then you believe in some form of spirituality.

If you believe that we are simply biological machines who live for 70 years and then become dirt and our consciousness is really our brain which dies, then you don't believe in the presence of spirit.

*IF* you believe in the presence of spirit, then you can build your own set of beliefs from the ground up. RELIGION is just ONE set of beliefs around spirituality. You do not have to prescribe to all the beliefs of any one religion to be spiritual. In fact, I don't, and neither does Steve Pavlina or many others here. A lot of us believe in the concept of spirituality, but not in the concept of following any one religion 100%.

Anyway, just something to think about.

[annie]

ok, cool. I wasn't exactly sure what the difference between "spiritual" and "religious" was in your terms.

Around here (my neck of the woods) people who are "spiritual" believe in God, they just don't go to church. Religious people believe/do both.

Interesting how people define it differently....no wonder there is such confusion!

[impaul99]

Originally Posted by Antiventurecapital

Look, here's my take on LoA.

LoA is a game to be played by fully-functioning adults, not children. To win at it you must be "3 for 3" as James Ray puts it. This means that your thoughts, emotions, and actions (<--Klang-klang-klang!!!) must all be in alignment.

To me it's little more than a New Age variation of the "little train that could":

belief in oneself + positive expectations + action = results

Let me ask you this then. Lets say that two identical twins decide to build a muscular physique starting with their 18th birthday. Let's assume that they both eat EXACTLY the same things, they sleep EXACTLY the same amount and all things are exactly the same in this experiment, and they both follow the exact same regiment of physical activity. For example lifting 150lbs benchpress x 10 reps x 3 sets, or whatever. So they have the same DNA, same everything and DO the same actions.

Twin A believes in himself, has a positive expectation, and uses LoA to visualize himself being muscular.

Twin B doesn't believe in himself, has a negative expectation, and uses LoA to visualize failing to build muscle.

Do you think after 2 years of following this regiment, that both twins would build the same amount of muscle?

In other words, do you think that the belief and positive expectation part of the equation you posted is simply there to drive us to take action (motivational force), but as long as we take action anyways, the first 2 parts can be taken out of the equation all together?

[Antiventurecapital]

Originally Posted by annie

ok, cool. I wasn't exactly sure what the difference between "spiritual" and "religious" was in your terms.

Around here (my neck of the woods) people who are "spiritual" believe in God, they just don't go to church. Religious people believe/do both.

Don't forget that there are many definitions of god as well. There are the deistic and theistic versions for starters. I'm more of a deistic god believer like most of the Founding Fathers were.

[impaul99]

Originally Posted by Antiventurecapital

LoA is a game to be played by fully-functioning adults, not children.

I disagree. I've been using it since I was a kid. I didn't call it that at the time of course, but I've been using it since I can remember.

LoA doesn't have an age limit.

[Antiventurecapital]

Originally Posted by impaul99

Let me ask you this then. Lets say that two identical twins decide to build a muscular physique starting with their 18th birthday. Let's assume that they both eat EXACTLY the same things, they sleep EXACTLY the same amount and all things are exactly the same in this experiment, and they both follow the exact same regiment of physical activity. For example lifting 150lbs benchpress x 10 reps x 3 sets, or whatever. So they have the same DNA, same everything and DO the same actions.

Twin A believes in himself, has a positive expectation, and uses LoA to visualize himself being muscular.

Twin B doesn't believe in himself, has a negative expectation, and uses LoA to visualize failing to build muscle.

Do you think after 2 years of following this regiment, that both twins would build the same amount of muscle?

In other words, do you think that the belief and positive expectation part of the equation you posted is simply there to drive us to take action (motivational force), but as long as we take action anyways, the first 2 parts can be taken out of the equation all together?

I used to be a musclehead who spent many years in the gym, so I am fully qualified to answer your question.

The answer is that if both are following the exact same routines at the gym, they will both have the same muscle mass as a result.

[annie]

Originally Posted by Antiventurecapital

Look, here's my take on LoA.

LoA is a game to be played by fully-functioning adults, not children. To win at it you must be "3 for 3" as James Ray puts it. This means that your thoughts, emotions, and actions (<--Klang-klang-klang!!!) must all be in alignment.

To me it's little more than a New Age variation of the "little train that could":

belief in oneself + positive expectations + action = results

Did I emphasize the action part enough?

Hell, you could drop the first two components and still get most things with just the action part.

Where LoA all falls apart for me and most people is when some start to believe they are gods:

I brought the great Tsunami down upon me.
\


I made those jets crash into the WTC.
\


I manifested that earth quake.
\



Yes, of course you did.
\

It's just that there actually are 2 different Law of Attractions....I'm a bit slow, but it's as clear as ever tonight in this thread.

The Law of Attraction: (what I think it originally was intended to be....but yeah, that's just my opinion)

LOA....which holds that you create your own reality through your thoughts. You can, if you wish, take this figuratively, to mean that by changing your thoughts you can feel better about your situation in life. Or you can view it as a source of inspiration—that by believing you will succeed, you will perform better in the race or the test or your relationships.


The Secret Guru's LOA: Explicity claims that you can manipulate objective physical reality.....the numbers in a lottery drawing, the actions of other people who may not even know you exist....through your thoughts and feelings. In the words of Lisa Nichols: “When you think of the things you want, and you focus on them with all of your intention, then the law of attraction will give you exactly what you want, every time.” Every time!”

Yeah....these are 2 different animals

[Antiventurecapital]

Originally Posted by annie

It's just that there actually are 2 different Law of Attractions....

LOA....which holds that you create your own reality through your thoughts. You can, if you wish, take this figuratively, to mean that by changing your thoughts you can feel better about your situation in life. Or you can view it as a source of inspiration—that by believing you will succeed, you will perform better in the race or the test or your relationships.

This the correct version.

The other one is just wishful thinking.

[impaul99]

Originally Posted by Antiventurecapital

I used to be a musclehead who spent many years in the gym, so I am fully qualified to answer your question.

The answer is that if both are following the exact same routines at the gym, they will both have the same muscle mass as a result.

That's what I thought.

Some of us, including me, believe that their results would be different. In other words, we believe that LoA isn't just a fancy way to motivate yourself to take action. Using LoA effectively, you can affect your reality to such a degree that only a very small amount of action, if any at all, might be needed to produce the same results others produce with a lot of action.

I'm not saying your formula doesn't work. It does. I'm just saying, that I used to think the way you do but then I decided to try things out, just for shits and giggles and see if I could "attract" things out of thin air, without taking action and stuff and it worked. There are a few of us here that have had success in that way. Our understanding of LoA is different than what you describe.

In your version of LoA, there is no reason a 5 year old girl should get raped, because she didn't DO anything to deserve it.

[impaul99]

Originally Posted by Antiventurecapital

This the correct version.

The other one is just wishful thinking.

Until one day you realize it's not.

[Antiventurecapital]

Originally Posted by impaul99

In your version of LoA, there is no reason a 5 year old girl should get raped, because she didn't DO anything to deserve it.

And you can take that one to the bank!
\

[impaul99]

Originally Posted by annie

The Secret Guru's LOA: Explicity claims that you can manipulate objective physical reality.....the numbers in a lottery drawing, the actions of other people who may not even know you exist....through your thoughts and feelings. In the words of Lisa Nichols: “When you think of the things you want, and you focus on them with all of your intention, then the law of attraction will give you exactly what you want, every time.” Every time!”

This is the one that works for me in my life, but I totally understand that most don't believe it yet so they choose the first one for now.

[Antiventurecapital]

Originally Posted by impaul99

This is the one that works for me in my life, but I totally understand that most don't believe it yet so they choose the first one for now.

So do you use your powers to win lotteries? Can I split a ticket with you for the next one?

What convinced you exactly that you can just will things into happening?

[annie]

Do you think that most people realize that there are 2 different camps within LOA?

I think it takes multiple exposures....to The Secret, discussion boards, articles etc.

I was all over The Secret when it came out, until I realized that The Secret's LOA makes some pretty big claims and they MEAN IT!

I really did get sucked into it for awhile because I liked the part about "being in control"....it was quite refreshing.

But I then some things happen...every day type things, like I got a cold. Well, it really did come from no where. I certainly hadn't thought a single thing about a cold...in fact I was only thinking healthy thoughts. And so that is another silly example of how I don't see LOA being all that you claim it is.

Also, when people that love The Secret guru's words that they don't have to know "the how"....that it will just show up....that REALLY bothers me as a life coach. I mean, what a cop out. I do have clients that know "the how/action" in getting in shape. But they still would rather sit on the coach and just VISUALIZE it. (rolls eyes)

[Antiventurecapital]

Originally Posted by annie

Do you think that most people realize that there are 2 different camps within LOA?

I think it takes multiple exposures....to The Secret, discussion boards, articles etc.

I was all over The Secret when it came out, until I realized that The Secret's LOA makes some pretty big claims and they MEAN IT!

I really did get sucked into it for awhile because I liked the part about "being in control"....it was quite refreshing.

But I then some things happen...every day type things, like I got a cold. Well, it really did come from no where. I certainly hadn't thought a single thing about a cold...in fact I was only thinking healthy thoughts. And so that is another silly example of how I don't see LOA being all that you claim it is.

Also, when people that love The Secret guru's words that they don't have to know "the how"....that it will just show up....that REALLY bothers me as a life coach. I mean, what a cop out. I do have clients that know "the how/action" in getting in shape. But they still would rather sit on the coach and just VISUALIZE it. (rolls eyes)

How did you post this if you are not here?
\

[annie]

It's just a little LOA SECRET I know

[impaul99]

Originally Posted by Antiventurecapital

So do you use your powers to win lotteries? Can I split a ticket with you for the next one?

What convinced you exactly that you can just will things into happening?

No, I don't use the lottery because I don't like the exposure it brings. I also don't tell the universe HOW to give me the things I want, just what I want. Perhaps one day it will use the lottery to flow money to me, but I hardly play so it's very unlikely.

What convinced me? Actually, my ego is pretty stubborn, conservative and skeptical, so it took a lot more than just one thing to convince me. It took about 6 months of events that really set the starting point, followed by about 3.5 years of further events, during which time I've helped others use it in their life over the last 12 months or so.

Also, I started using "The Secret"/LoA from "The Science of Getting Rich" not from the movie "The Secret". I didn't see "The Secret" until well after I was already using LoA in my life. The Science of Getting Rich is the book that the movie is based on. It gives you the complete process, not just an intro of the process like the DVD.

Paul

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Antiventurecapital

What convinced you exactly that you can just will things into happening?

If you'd really like to know - it's my excessively meticulous nature.

When my manifestations started happening, it seemed miraculous but I could not dismiss the possibility that they were attributable to good luck, random coincidence, my own natural talent & hard work etc.

So I started to record my own manifestations in writing. As time went on, I got more and more compelling evidence of LOA at work (compelling to me, at any rate). But my own recording methodology failed to satisfy me, because I wasn't always very disciplined and regular or sufficiently detailed in doing the recording. As I compared the latest events in my life with my previously-written notes, I wasn't entirely satisfied that my memory wasn't playing tricks on me.

In September 2006, I decided to improve my recording method even further, by starting a personal blog, which I planned to regularly update with details about my goals, my plans, my progress etc. This helped somewhat. However, by November 2006, I realised the shortcomings of this method. Although by then I had quite detailed recordings of the events of my life, and furthermore quite considerable successes in various things, it was still not possible to prove to my own skeptical mind that all these successes weren't due to my own talent, hard work, charming manners etc.

So I refined the experiment even further. Firstly I decided to start recording in even more detail, the different LOA techniques that I use, the dates on which I did the IM exercises, the events that subsequently happened etc etc.

Secondly, apart from recording my manifestations and actual events in my life, I would set for myself ridiculously and irrationally ambitious goals. (In fact in Nov, I announced all this on this forum). So this is what I wrote on my blog in Nov:

2007 shall be the year of my Great Experiment. I shall set huge goals for myself. They should be so huge that it would appear impossible for me to attain them through normal means.

Except that I do not intend to employ normal means. That's where the experiment begins.

Since then I have been achieving ridiculously and irrationally successful results. I have mentioned them several times on this forum, so I shall not do so again - I think it will start to appear boastful.

However, you are free to plough through the extensive posts on my blog for the details.

Because I have such big goals now and such detailed records of my LOA efforts as well as personal actions taken towards such goals, and I am recording all this down in considerable detail, I have had plenty of material to analyse.

After analysis, I have seen quite clearly (for myself anyway) that while personal effort definitely does play a big part, the universe also bends itself to help you achieve your intentions, if you do your conscious creation.

The fulfilment of a goal can require a number of steps. Some steps clearly are within your control. Other steps are apparently not. What I am seeing, more and more clearly every day, is that the "Apparently Not" steps are also within your control. With LOA.

To give you a simple example (just one - otherwise I will appear boastful), if you go through my blog, you may see that I had the intention for a new job. Four opportunities automatically came to me, before I even had time to send out one single application or look at any job ad. I have now accepted one of them. I start work later this month. I will have the rank of Director in a global role, in an international bank. I will be one of the youngest persons in the entire organisation ever to hold such a senior position.

And guess what - I don't even have any direct experience in this area of work.

It's a kind of magic.

My experiment still goes on, by the way. Possibly it will go on for the rest of my life, because increasingly I see it as an endless journey (and I'm not saying that just because Abraham-Hicks said so). Anyway, these are my some of my currently outstanding goals. I told you that they are ridiculously and irrationally ambitious. But you're welcome to keep checking back on me in the course of 2007, to watch me achieve them.

[Frans]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

My experiment still goes on, by the way. Possibly it will go on for the rest of my life, because increasingly I see it as an endless journey (and I'm not saying that just because Abraham-Hicks said so). Anyway, these are my some of my currently outstanding goals. I told you that they are ridiculously and irrationally ambitious. But you're welcome to keep checking back on me in the course of 2007, to watch me achieve them.

Acting Like Godot, unlike most other bloggers, your blog is totally anonymous.
Nobody can check whether the facts you mention are "real", because nobody knows your real identity. So, I bet we can read on your blog next year that you've achieved all your goals in 2007.