Egocentrism = Law of Attraction?

[LassieLove]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

I don't really agree with this either:

"Besides, no matter how much people want to deny it, one person's success can be another person's failure."

That is because I can think of thousands of examples where one person's success does not cause another person's failure, and might in fact lead to many other people's success.

Not even a billion counterexamples can prove my claim wrong for my claim was not that one person's success inevitably (that is, in all cases) leads to someone else's failure. My claim was that one person's success CAN lead to someone else's failure. And I gave examples of this, and these examples prove my claim to be correct.

You are correct in thinking that most phenomena have such a vast impact on the surrounding world that it cannot be judged to be solely bad -- there's always a drop of good in every evil. That, however, doesn't make the evil right.

Furthermore, I believe that one person's success usually is other people's failure if that person is not concerned for other people at all or is ignorant about other people's problems and how to help them. There are such people as Paulo Coelho whose success can probably do more good than harm because he truly inspires people, but then there are also a lot of very rich people whose greatest impact lies in polluting the planet, wasting our shared resources on their own shallow desires etc.

"Not to mention the fact that wealthy people pay more taxes (which go back to society generally) and can give much larger charitable donations, than poor people."

As far as I know, the "trickle down" theory has been proven to be incorrect. The rich getting even richer hasn't helped the poor to become any richer. In fact, as the income gap increases, the poorest become even poorer. Here are some statistics you may find interesting:
Opinion - Image - NYTimes.com

Also, richer people are found to be more egocentric and less empathetic than poor people. The rich generally give a smaller proportion of their possessions to charity voluntarily than the poor. I've seen studies on this. Here's the first google result that I found:
Rich less empathetic than poor, study says - Association for Psychological Science

It is also found in researches that people are happiest in the countries with the lowest disparities in income. So, statistically, having very rich people among us doesn't make people happier. The "trickle down effect" doesn't work.

And look at Africa. People becoming rich in America and spending their money on luxurious houses, swimming pools in their backyards, cosmetic surgery, traveling in first class etc isn't helping Africa. To claim anything else is insipidly arrogant and wrong.

Ah, this is such a vast topic... I could rant on and on about this forever and it's not so easy for me to argue in a language that's not my mother tongue and I have to back to doing work now... but anyway, people are just so ignorant on this subject, it makes me fume.

Like, for example, the idea that rich people can donate more to charity... Yes, that's true, but if income gaps were smaller in the first place, we wouldn't even need charity.

If we have a billion dollars and one person possesses half of them, it's true that he can give more to others than anyone else. He can also keep more to himself than anyone else and play power games more than anyone else. He can, for example, manipulate people to work for him with big promises of financial success while leaving a minority of people on the ourskirts of society, weak and helpless, making sure that no one is engaged in helping them because everyone's just so focused on earning their own living. If everyone had enough money, food etc, on the other hand, no one would even be dependent on the rich person's charity.

And no I don't support communism, I just support logic.

[LassieLove]

"You also referred to the desire for a "perfect body" and suggested that it is a very common LOA intention. Well, if I have a perfect body, how does that hurt or harm you in any way. It doesn't. I mean, it isn't my fault if you wish to feel offended by the superficiality you see in my intention."

You are correct, your having a perfect body doesn't harm me in any way. But if having a perfect body is in your top priorities, it harms you. And it harms people in general if such priorities are encouraged and emphasised.

In any case, having a perfect body among your top desires is shallow and makes you egocentric and, when you are most concerned about how your own body looks, you don't have as much energy to be oriented towards other people as you would otherwise have. No, you can't have everything and be everything. You have to focus and make choices. And if your choice is cultivating your physical body, that choice keeps resources away from your other choices such as caring for other people.

Another psychology fact: eating diserders are correlated with narcissism.

[LassieLove]

Oh and just so I'm not completely misunderstood: I think it's fine to be selfish sometimes. It's ok to desire a beautiful body and to work for it! What's not ok with me is making untrue claims about how it actually doesn't harm anyone if people are overly concerned about how their bodies look, or how it's actually not harmful to anyone to be rich and to then use nearly all of one's money on self-centered, shallow desires. Be selfish all you want but please don't be hypocritical about it.

[Acting Like Godot]

You have made lots of points which I disagree with. But hey, you are entitled to your opinions.

Personally, I believe that if everyone achieved more of their goals (whatever their goals may be), the world in general becomes a better place.

In general I am also doubtful of zero-sum perspectives (what you described as "simple maths). This is because I see many opportunities for win-win outcomes everywhere I go. Basically, situations where everyone gains something, and everyone walks away feeling more satisfied, more pleased, more fulfilled.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by LassieLove

In fact, as the income gap increases, the poorest become even poorer.

Alternatively everyone can just get poorer together, as does happen in some African countries. Hope that makes you feel better.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by LassieLove

And look at Africa. People becoming rich in America and spending their money on luxurious houses, swimming pools in their backyards, cosmetic surgery, traveling in first class etc isn't helping Africa. To claim anything else is insipidly arrogant and wrong.

You can also be poor and unemployed in America. In case you didn't notice, that doesn't help Africa either.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by LassieLove

The rich generally give a smaller proportion of their possessions to charity voluntarily than the poor.

Think in absolute terms.

0.00001% of Warren Buffet's wealth is more than your entire life savings. And he gave much more than that away.

Also, as I mentioned, the rich generate economic spin-offs for lots of people, without even giving to charity.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by LassieLove

Furthermore, I believe that one person's success usually is other people's failure if that person is not concerned for other people at all or is ignorant about other people's problems and how to help them.

That's a big if.

Unfortunately your post is heavily littered with this kind of "if" and plenty of assumptions.

You seem to assume that if a person is rich and successful, he is "evil" (quoting your choice of adjective"), wants to "pollute the world", seeks to play "power games", wants to distract others from helping the poor, is "egocentric" and "less empathetic".

This is as illogical as assuming that if a person has a perfect body, she suffers from eating disorders.

[Solipsist]

Originally Posted by LassieLove

Oh and just so I'm not completely misunderstood: I think it's fine to be selfish sometimes. It's ok to desire a beautiful body and to work for it! What's not ok with me is making untrue claims about how it actually doesn't harm anyone if people are overly concerned about how their bodies look, or how it's actually not harmful to anyone to be rich and to then use nearly all of one's money on self-centered, shallow desires. Be selfish all you want but please don't be hypocritical about it.

I honestly think it depends on the motive, here.

I, personally, intend to get fit--I've been watching closely what I eat, and I've given up smoking. I just feel better, physically, for doing this. I haven't started walking regularly, yet, but when or if that day comes, and I gain the "perfect body", are you to say that I am selfish in wanting to be fit?

I know quite a number of people who think the same way--they watch what they eat, and they workout to be fit, not to "have the perfect body," even though that's what might result. And, I honestly don't think that it's selfish at all to have that attitude. Now, if they're really doing what they're doing to have a "perfect body," then I'll agree with you. But you don't know if a person with a "perfect body" actually gained that "perfect body" intentionally, unless you asked them (or, unless they're bodybuilders in some kind of competition). Hence, I don't think it wise to assume it.

There's nothing wrong with self-love, indeed it is healthy. But, all too often, self-love is confused for egocentrism, when they're different animals, entirely.

[Acting Like Godot]

People who have very imperfect bodies - eg the obese, the smokers etc - are actually making the world a worse place.

With bad health, they will generally do less well in whatever they do, than if they had good health. Thus their ability to contribute usefully to the world declines.

Apart from their own suffering, they also strain the healthcare system and consume more of public healthcare resources, as they are more prone to serious illness.

Generally they also cause health insurance premiums to go up, for everyone else.

Thus if you are a considerate person, you will strive to have at least a reasonably healthy body.

[LassieLove]

Solipsist,

"I, personally, intend to get fit--I've been watching closely what I eat, and I've given up smoking. I just feel better, physically, for doing this. I haven't started walking regularly, yet, but when or if that day comes, and I gain the "perfect body", are you to say that I am selfish in wanting to be fit?"

Depends on how "selfish" is defined. I certainly don't think there's anything wrong with wanting to get fit. I exercise, too, and I watch what I eat, and it makes me feel good about myself and I think it even makes me a better person to others that I feel good about myself.

But I cannot claim that the time I spend on getting fit and watching what I eat couldn't be spent on something else, such as caring for other people. I make a choice to be "selfish", I'm responsible for my choice and am ok with it. It only becomes a problem when I'm overly concerned about my body and dieting so that I don't have enough energy to focus on other things, some of which may be even more important *gasp* than a perfect body.

Don't you think that today's society is a little bit too focused on the perfect body?

I've read that in big cities women's happiness correlates with beauty (when beauty is evaluated by the "perfect" WHR) but in the countryside it doesn't. This leads me to believe that society, advertisements and our surroundings can and do influence our priorities and values. Don't you think that society's values should be re-examined? Do you not care at all if women evaluate their self-worth based on their WHR, knowing that adverts etc encourage this kind of thinking and knowing that there are alternative ways of evaluating one's self-worth?

"But you don't know if a person with a "perfect body" actually gained that "perfect body" intentionally, unless you asked them (or, unless they're bodybuilders in some kind of competition). Hence, I don't think it wise to assume it."

I don't assume it. But I've actually seen advertisments (even a LOA video) that say things like "YOU CAN HAVE THE BODY OF YOUR DREAMS IN JUST SIX WEEKS!" I also know that many people suffer from eating disorders and little girls want to be "thin like Bratz" and a lot of ten-year-old girls have a distorted body image and believe they should lose weight. So I know that a sick attitude towards the body does exist in our society in ways that could be changed. Did you know, for example, that Asian women didn't suffer from Western eating disorders before Asia was "westernised"?

[Solipsist]

I could take issue with a couple of points there, ALG, but I won't, as it detracts from what I wanted to add to my last post, which was ...

... that it is just as egocentric to say, "I am fat," as it is to say, "I have a perfect body." The only difference is what form the egocentrism takes.

[LassieLove]

Ok. I think that it's perfectly alright to get fit. I, in fact, think that it's a good and advisable thing to get fit.

I think that getting fit shouldn't be so much about getting the "perfect" body, but about getting into a healthy, strong, independent, feel-good, self-respecting state.

[LassieLove]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

That's a big if.

Unfortunately your post is heavily littered with this kind of "if" and plenty of assumptions.

You seem to assume that if a person is rich and successful, he is "evil" (quoting your choice of adjective"), wants to "pollute the world", seeks to play "power games", wants to distract others from helping the poor, is "egocentric" and "less empathetic"..

Clearly you didn't read very carefully what I wrote. Those were examples. I do not think and have not claimed that all rich people are evil. You pointed out that they can do more good than others. I pointed out that this is based solely on their greater power. When someone has power, this person can do more good and more evil than others. Rich people can do either good or bad things with their power. A lot of them are very selfish and don't care about contributing much to others. As I pointed out, rich people are generally more self-centered and less empathetic than poor people. This is the result of scientific research.

"This is as illogical as assuming that if a person has a perfect body, she suffers from eating disorders."

I have not assumed such things. You seem to have assumed a lot concerning my opinions.

Of course being rich doesn't inevitably make a person less empathetic. But, statistically, it does. The rich are generally less empathetic than the poor. (Reading about these research results actually surprised myself because I know that there are many horrible fates among the very poor and I would assume that people who have horrible childhoods would more prone to becoming narcissists, sociopaths, criminals and the like.)

[Solipsist]

Originally Posted by LassieLove

Ok. I think that it's perfectly alright to get fit. I, in fact, think that it's a good and advisable thing to get fit.

I think that getting fit shouldn't be so much about getting the "perfect" body, but about getting into a healthy, strong, independent, feel-good, self-respecting state.

Yes, I agree.

The problem, though, as a few of my friends have experienced, is that, while they're just dieting and exercising to be fit, others are thinking that they have, and are jealous or envious of, their "perfect body." (I don't have this problem, as some people have called me "fat", even when I've been fairly fit ). It is also egocentrism that is jealous or envious of one's "perfect body," regardless of the intention of the one who has a "perfect body."

But, to be frank, regardless of their motive, so what if someone has a "perfect body?" Seriously, what harm could that possibly cause another person? And saying that someone is egocentric just because they have what one might consider a "perfect body" is, itself, egocentric.

A bit of advice, if I may--stop worrying about other people and their motives. Focus on yourself. When you do, you simply won't pay attention to what others do, because you'll be too concerned with what you're doing.

[LassieLove]

Originally Posted by Solipsist

The problem, though, as a few of my friends have experienced, is that, while they're just dieting and exercising to be fit, others are thinking that they have, and are jealous or envious of, their "perfect body."

Ok, well I ackonwedge that as a problem, too.

"But, to be frank, regardless of their motive, so what if someone has a "perfect body?" Seriously, what harm could that possibly cause another person?"

Nothing. I didn't criticise having a perfect body, I criticised having a perfect body as top priority. Having a perfect body as a top priority seems to be the message of many advertisements and LOA videos/speeches/texts and this I criticised.

"A bit of advice, if I may--stop worrying about other people and their motives. Focus on yourself. When you do, you simply won't pay attention to what others do, because you'll be too concerned with what you're doing."

What makes you think that I worry about other people and their motives? What I criticised was superficial adverts and LOA videos/speeches/books and people who are fooled by those things -- not people who happen to have beautiful bodies because they exercise a lot.

Or are you saying that stating my opinions on the Internet is "worrying about other people and their motives"? In that case you're doing the same.

[Solipsist]

Originally Posted by LassieLove

"But, to be frank, regardless of their motive, so what if someone has a "perfect body?" Seriously, what harm could that possibly cause another person?"

Nothing. I didn't criticise having a perfect body, I criticised having a perfect body as top priority. Having a perfect body as a top priority seems to be the message of many advertisements and LOA videos/speeches/texts and this I criticised.

"A bit of advice, if I may--stop worrying about other people and their motives. Focus on yourself. When you do, you simply won't pay attention to what others do, because you'll be too concerned with what you're doing."

What makes you think that I worry about other people and their motives? What I criticised was superficial adverts and LOA videos/speeches/books and people who are fooled by those things -- not people who happen to have beautiful bodies because they exercise a lot.

Or are you saying that stating my opinions on the Internet is "worrying about other people and their motives"? In that case you're doing the same.

Well, I think the very topic, and that you would "criticize having a perfect body as a top priority" is questioning motive. Not that there's anything wrong with that. I did it for quite some time, myself, and so I won't criticize you for doing it.

I only suggested that you focus on yourself, because, after worrying about other peoples' motives for so long myself, since I no longer do that, I've become a much happier person, and most assuredly one for whom the LoA is more likely to work, because, as instead of finding fault among others, I'm more grateful for what I *do* have. Generally, I suggest to everyone that they focus on oneself, because life is so much more beautiful if you do.

Of course, you can do as you will. I only made the point, because I learned the hard way that to criticize anyone for their ego is just more ego. That's all.

[oasis]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

You have made lots of points which I disagree with. But hey, you are entitled to your opinions.

Personally, I believe that if everyone achieved more of their goals (whatever their goals may be), the world in general becomes a better place.

In general I am also doubtful of zero-sum perspectives (what you described as "simple maths). This is because I see many opportunities for win-win outcomes everywhere I go. Basically, situations where everyone gains something, and everyone walks away feeling more satisfied, more pleased, more fulfilled.

In my view, what we want doesnt always necessarily make us happy or feel fulfilled. You've made posts in the past about understanding the true motivations behind a desire, and quite often the real motivation is something you need to work on in its own right.

Eg you pointed out that someone may want to stop wearing glasses, but if the real reason is that you have low self esteem and care too much about what otehrs think, then not wearing glasses won't solve that.

[Zenn]

LOA is amoral and non judgmental.

Judgments clutter the mind and obscure observations. Morality and judgments are also fluid, changing with time, societies, and even a person's life. One makes better decisions by accepting that it is what it is, so what I do about it that is best for my objective? Is it more efficient to change the system or use and benefit from it in order to achieve what one wishes, including benefiting the most people possible? Or one can choose to do both.

LessieLove, you seem to think of competitive wealth without consideration for creative wealth. When one creates, it raises the quality of life and wealth for many, sometimes the whole humanity. Today many poor people in wealthy countries live better than ancient royalties. There is generally no begrudging a wealth creator being wealthy. America went through its gloriously wealthy period with many inventions and innovations. For the last few decades, it has shifted to the competitive wealth mode, where wealth is a zero sum game. One gets by taking from others, by any means including force, and a few, be they nations, corporations, or individuals, may have so much by taking that great disparities are created. People fight for their shares of the pie, and are angry against those who have larger pieces, whereas it's much better to direct the energy to making a bigger pie or more pies to share instead. E.g. Instead of going to wars for oil, U.S. could have used the resources differently and already discovered or created clean renewable abundant energy available for all. BTW, the American Pie is really a soufflé - fiat currency indiscriminately printed without real wealth created.

There will always be inequalities. If the world's wealth is evenly divided among all individuals, in a just a few years, there will again be the rich and the poor, though not necessarily the same as before. Different people benefit differently under different systems, but the innately wealthy will thrive under any circumstances. In any case, you can't be poor enough to help the poor or sick enough to help the sick. Neither health nor wealth is really a zero sum game. They are from the Source and in abundance. You receive from the Source and spread it around, without depriving somebody else.

[Acting Like Godot]

Even time is not a zero-sum game.

I digress, but today I share a tip on time management.

LassieLove has assumed that any time spent doing X (eg "keeping fit") is time taken away from the possibility of doing something better (eg "caring for other people").

Now, I happen to be one of those people who regularly get a heck of a lot of things done in my life. And I have mentioned my secret of time management several times, although usually in the Personal Effectiveness section of this forum.

Here's the secret again. Suppose you have several goals and intentions. To expand your time, concentrate on activities which advance you towards two or three (or even more) of your goals, at the same time.

For example, how do you "keep fit" and "care for other people" at the same time? Simple. Again I can think of dozens of examples. Here are a few:

1. Go out with your family and have some fun outdoors. Eg take the kids swimming, or biking, or trekking, or to play tennis etc. You can keep fit, while simultaneously spending quality time with the people you care about, and inspiring them to keep fit and healthy.

2. In my country at least, charitable organizations often organize sports events with a charitable theme. For example, Yellow Ribbon (which helps to rehabilitate ex-convicts and reintegrate them back into society) organizes a running event. If you participate, your entry fee goes towards the charity; and you help towards an event that will raise public awareness of ex-convicts' challenges and issues. Oh, running also helps you to keep fit.

3. There is a forummer here (who goes by the moniker LifeisAmazing). Read his post. His life is a story about how "keeping fit" and "caring for others" go hand in hand. He is personally very interested in health and fitness, and he wants to spread his message and inspire as many people as possible to become fit and healthy. This is his way of caring for the world. He works as a fitness trainer.

In fact, LifeisAmazing's lifestyle can easily encompass LassieLove's third theme too -"making money". The things which LifeisAmazing does as a fitness trainer can easily advance him towards three goals at the same time - keeping fit himself; caring for others by teaching and inspiring them to keep fit ... AND making money.

--------

THAT is the time management tip from ALG today. With some creativity, you can identify certain types of activities, each of which can simultaneously advance you towards two, three or even more of your intentions at the same time.

Here are examples from my own life:

- I enjoy gardening.
- I also want my kids to do well in school and be interested in science etc.
- I like to spend time with them.

A very time-efficient activity: when I do gardening, I often get them to come along to help. I show them different types of plants; I explain photosynthesis; we do little experiments involving plant cuttings; we talk about soil types, pollination, fertilizers etc.

- I am interested in improving my public speaking skills.
- I work in a bank and am interested in deepening my understanding of the industry.
- I want to raise awareness of how banks can be made safer.
- I am interested in raising my personal profile and achieving career success.

A very time-efficient activity: speaking at conferences, on different aspects of how banks can be made safer. I've spoken at two such conferences this year, and was recently invited to do a 3rd.

- I am a published writer, best known for poetry.
- I love kids.
- I'm always happy to make a bit of extra money.

Recently, a newspaper invited me to write a children's poem, for a series of articles that they plan to publish, about how parents can encourage their kids' interest in reading. I have not written for kids before, but I accepted the invitation because it simultaneously fulfills three goals/interests of mine. I have composed a whimsical, humorous children's poem which will be published next month. It gives me publicity (this is the country's main newspaper); kids will enjoy my poem; and I get paid.

[Zenn]

Great points ALG, on multifunctional activities instead of multitasking. Exercises are probably the most easily integrated healthy activities. I walk all distances within 45 minutes whenever possible, getting physical exercise as well as mental benefits (walking meditation), not contributing to pollution while saving some money as well. I have come to the aids of and saved a few lives along the way too while walking.

Many personal healthy practices benefit the world as well. Eat less, eat better. It will cut down obesity, leave more and better quality food for the world, preserve more nature, reduce cruelty to animals, and limit environmental damages and climate changes. As well, smaller people consume much less of other resources, from necessary material for accommodation and personal goods to demand on energy, requiring less fuel for food production, to keep smaller dwellings warm or cool, and to transport persons as well as goods. It will significantly cut down US dependence on foreign oil, curtailing wars (=huge reduction of suffering and damages!) Healthier population will greatly reduce medical costs and human resources for other pursuits of advancements. As well, healthy people can contribute more to society and better take care of others instead needing cares themselves. Yes, perfect health has no down sides. It doesn't take from others but enables one to give more easily.

I do not support cancer industry and I figure the best thing I can do against cancer is to stay healthy. I don't drain resources that way. Each person on the healthy side makes the statistic difference of 2 between the two sides, healthy and cancer. That beats all the runnings and donations and other involvements, which would only draw the disease undesirably into my consciousness. No, I don't consider my good health a selfish immoral concern in any way. In fact, I help others regain their health, if they so desire. But I don't do cancer, or any other disease du jour.

[hamix]

Originally Posted by Joebenz

Hi,

There is something i always wanted to know about LOA.
The technique for using LOA is about pretending or convincing yourself that you already got what you want, right?
And when i see all these rappers on TV saying "I got all the money in the world, i got all the ladies in the world etc..." then they have HUGE million dollars mansions.
And when i saw an interview of Justin bieber on TV, the reporter asked "What would you do if you fail in your career?" and he immidietly replied "That won't happen". She then said "yes but what if?" and he said "no no that's not gonna happen". Like if doesn't even think one second about failure and now look where he is now...
But mostly my question is, does egocentrism can make law of attraction work?
It seems that the awnser is YES but what do you think about this?

Being assured is distinct from egocentricism.