Egocentrism = Law of Attraction?

[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?

[ButterflyWoman]

Originally Posted by Joebenz

The technique for using LOA is about pretending or convincing yourself that you already got what you want, right?

Well.... if that works for you. It doesn't appear to work for a lot of people. There's really no such thing as "the" technique for anything as nebulous as reality creation.

Originally Posted by Joebenz

But mostly my question is, does egocentrism can make law of attraction work?

Do you actually consider self-confidence and refusal to accept the possibility of failure to be "egocentrism"? If so, you might want to examine your own beliefs in that area.

[ChrisGinsburg]

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?

If one truly believes they can't fail, yes, their reality will shape accordingly. Many people can say they believe this but hardly anyone really believes it.

[ButterflyWoman]

Just a side thought, it's probably easier for someone like Justin Bieber to form and hold a belief that he can't fail because because 1) he is actually talented (or so I'm led to believe), 2) he's already had considerable success in his chosen field, and 3) he's a teenaged boy, and most teenaged boys think themselves to be bulletproof, even without any evidence toward that. It's easy to imagine how these factors could come together to form a rock-hard belief that failure is simply not possible.

The fear of failure (i.e., the belief that we might and maybe will fail) is something that the majority of humans struggle with, or simply accept without any consideration or awareness. In fact, most humans adopt the belief in (fear of) failure pretty early on, and that shapes their reality from then on in a self-affirming pattern.

[Joebenz]

Originally Posted by CaterpillarWoman

Do you actually consider self-confidence and refusal to accept the possibility of failure to be "egocentrism"?

Not exactly but it's the primary "symptoms" of egocentrism in an extreme way that you'll find in every one of them.

When i see in all of these forums about intuitions that ego blocks this ego blocks that... i thougtht it would also block the law of attraction but it doesn't seem to be that way.

[Balbrae]

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?

I think your observations have some merit. As for the rappers focusing on success--they often do so with great detail and vividness, which is known to generate emotional fuel for the manifestation of change (images along the lines of what you say: "I got all the money in the world," "I got all the ladies in the world," "I got bling here and bling there," etc.). As for Justin Bieber refusing to contemplate failure, that is another good example.

Mike Dooley, author of Manifesting Change (a very good audio book), points out something quite interesting which makes me think of your point about not accepting failure: one doesn't really know one fails if one never gives up. One could die trying and be none the wiser. So the notion of failure has an element of time, which is considered by many to be an illusion, anyway.

As for whether egocentrism makes the LoA work, I would say "no." The law is the law is the law is the law. It pre-existed our manifestation into this so-called physical reality--it is the prime cause of our spirit's manifestation into the physical world. We are conscious co-creators dwelling among of our creations, including the "seeming" reality of our existence in physical form. Given that the LoA predated our taking human form, the LoA is not caused by, or made to work by, human egocentrism. Were that true, then the LoA would not "work" for those who did not muster up egocentrism. But the LoA is always at work, and those with little or no egocentrism also get what they think about, under the LoA.

Again, citing Mike Dooley, the LoA is like gravity--it's just a law. It doesn't care about the particulars of a person's situation--it just works on anyone and everyone, based on the law of vibration and the dominant content of their thoughts.

[Bonadea]

I think it does because they don't have 'limiting beliefs' stand in the way.

I'm not worthy, I don't deserve it, someone deserves it more, what if it hurts someone in the process, type of thing.



Like going for a promotion....

Say 1 person is very self centered and egotistical. Nothing's clogging up the thought system. They want the promotion and they deserve it, period.

Where is someone else me, am I really good enough, is this taking it away form someone who needs it more, all this stuff clouds it up.

[ButterflyWoman]

Originally Posted by Bonadea

I'm not worthy, I don't deserve it, someone deserves it more, what if it hurts someone in the process...

I might fail, this can't last, I'm not star material...

The thing is, I don't see the lack of these limiting beliefs or the presence of strong self-belief as being "egotistical". I just see it as a lack of limiting beliefs or the presence of strong, positive self-belief.

[Solipsist]

There are egocentrics in every walk of life. Protestants, Catholics, Jews, Muslims, Blacks, Whites, Republicans, Democrats, and yes, even LoA people can be egocentric.

It doesn't mean that it's a principle tenet of their method. However, indeed, I have always beleived that those who talk incessantly about "getting what you want" through the law of attraction to be primarily egocentric. I simply avoid those people, as I do Scientologists.

[Bonadea]

I'm not saying that everyone who has good positive beliefs is therefore egotistical.

But those people who would be considered that way, do better attracting because they naturally don't carry those negative beliefs.

[Joebenz]

Originally Posted by Bonadea

I'm not saying that everyone who has good positive beliefs is therefore egotistical.

But those people who would be considered that way, do better attracting because they naturally don't carry those negative beliefs.

Exactly i'm not saying that you HAVE to be egotistical to make it work. I know that everyone can make it work.
But as Bonadea said, when someone is egocentric, they usually don't have negative thoughts about themselves (exept jalousy)
I see that as some sort of side "companion" that can help you for LoA.

[Solipsist]

Originally Posted by Bonadea

I'm not saying that everyone who has good positive beliefs is therefore egotistical.

But those people who would be considered that way, do better attracting because they naturally don't carry those negative beliefs.

I don't think so, and the reason why is because egocentrism is really negative, in and of itself, and so, in the long run, they'll get their comeuppance.

Just look at that James Ray guy, who, it turns out, was, imo, quite egocentric. LoA all the way, but now serving time for negligent homicide.

Honestly, whether one uses the LoA or not, I really think it best to maintain a humble nature, as much as possible.

[LassieLove]

Originally Posted by Joebenz

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...

My first thought: "Idiot, can't you think hypothetically?"

I can answer a question about what if I was an angel even if I firmly believe that I'm not an angel.

Maybe he just didn't want to answer and that's fine but his grounding for not answering... "that won't happen"? WTF?

[ButterflyWoman]

Originally Posted by Bonadea

But those people who would be considered that way...

Considered egotistical by whom, and in what context? That's kind of what I was trying to get at. What is "egotistical" and who gets to decide who is it and who isn't it?

[LassieLove]

A lot of the LOA videos that I have seen have sadly been very materialistic: focusing on money, the perfect body etc. That's so superficial it makes me sick. Besides, no matter how much people want to deny it, one person's success can be another person's failure. Let me explain. If there's one billion dollars to share for everyone and one person takes half a billion dollars, that means there's less money for the others.

If there are one hundred people in a village and ninety people are working for one rich person, to build him a beautiful castle, that means that there's not enough builders for someone else's castle.

Don't you people understand this? Can't you do simple math??

You can close your eyes to the truth and believe that just thinking there's enough resources for everyone to have their own actual (material) castle will make this wish come true, but you are wrong, you are blind and you are materialistic. There are plenty of people in this world who are hungry and poor, and it is not because of their own negative thoughts. There is such a thing as coincidence and things just happening without an explanation. Some kids are born into a horrible environment, and if you choose to build a castle for yourself instead of helping those in need, you are indeed a selfish jerk.

This was aimed at anyone who's materialistic and who has stupid beliefs about everyone getting what they deserve and there being enough resources for everyone even if these resources keep being wasted on superficial things.

It's one thing to use the LOA in your own life, hoping for the best, but another to try and shove it down other people's throats and say things like "You don't have enough money? That means you're not positive enough! Your child is dying of cancer? Just think positively! <3 You think it's unfair that some people are billionaires while others struggle to make their living? You haven't understood the law of attraction yet!" (Ah, what a blithering idiot one has to be to say such things.)

Sorry for my bad English.

[Lionman]

Good examples, OP

An entertainer like Justin Bieber would have imagined themselves in shining lights, with applause and how great they would feel with all that positive attention.

Whether that's egotistical or not important. The end result is that he has to entertain to get the applause. He has to please others and he has to work at it.

Same for pretty much everything. Say if you visualize yourself running a huge multi-million $ business, enjoying your pool and personal masseuse. Even if that's egotistical, you still have to be providing products that people find valuable so you get the money in the first place. Otherwise you'd have nothing.

A book that explains this very well is "The Science of Getting Rich".

[Joebenz]

Originally Posted by Lionman

Good examples, OP

An entertainer like Justin Bieber would have imagined themselves in shining lights, with applause and how great they would feel with all that positive attention.

Whether that's egotistical or not important. The end result is that he has to entertain to get the applause. He has to please others and he has to work at it.

Same for pretty much everything. Say if you visualize yourself running a huge multi-million $ business, enjoying your pool and personal masseuse. Even if that's egotistical, you still have to be providing products that people find valuable so you get the money in the first place. Otherwise you'd have nothing.

A book that explains this very well is "The Science of Getting Rich".

It's like expecting something good to happen while not acting on it.

[Magmeta El]

All of us at one time or another have---> EXPERIENCED ---> 'LAW of Attraction'
so now we have ---> AWARENESS.
Follow your---> FIRST THOUGHT. It leads to the next ---> STEP,and the next.
---> KNOWING (confidence) is acquired in this way.
Get some QUIET everyday to CALM the waves of your GREAT MIND.
INTENTION is Greater-than---> DESIRE.
FOLLOW YOUR PATH, IT IS, YOUR PATH.

[Bonadea]

Considered egotistical by whom, and in what context? That's kind of what I was trying to get at. What is "egotistical" and who gets to decide who is it and who isn't it?

in this case, the op

[Solipsist]

Originally Posted by Magmeta El

INTENTION is Greater-than---> DESIRE.

THIS. Once I understood this, I realized that the LoA is not egocentric, in and of itself.

The above as critical to understanding the LoA, imo.

[Zenn]

Ex-lurker jumping in here.

I find much of spiritualism may fit the definition of "egocentrism' but it is actually two way as in one is all and all is one. However, the op conveys to me that it may be your point of view that is egocentric, not LOA. It seems by egocentrism you meant a "big ego" and daringly and overtly wanting and declaring what one wants with no alternatives considered. You use examples of people who are "successful" in your view, indicating you desire the same or at least find their "successes" positive and desirable. But LOA works the same for modest people, people of low self esteem and even self-loathing people as well. It also works to attract "failures" or what you consciously don't want. That's why I said it may be your view that was egocentric, as personal values and desirability were placed on what you consider "achievements" whereas LOA works as well for the opposites of such "achievements". These same "egocentric" people attract "failures" too as they likely have experiences you would not want at all. Thus egocentrism as you seem to imply does not equal LOA.

As a "technique", I think if by egocentrism you mean bold desires and intense focus excluding alternative possibilities to attract what you dearly want, it may work, depending on how truthfully "egocentric" you are. If it's fake-it-till-you-make-it, then it depends on if you succeed at faking till you actually believe it. Many highly successful people are natural at this "technique" which is innate and their true being.

JMHO to attract wisdom that is aplenty in the forum.

[LassieLove]

Let us remember that there have been many highly succesful people who I do not believe have used the law of attraction (at least not in the way that people think it works). For example, Albert Einstein. He was very depressed and considered himself a failure when he worked at a patent agency. I personally do not believe that he succeeded in becoming an acknowledged scientist by thinking things like "I (will) succeed!", "I am famous!", "Failure is not an option!" "I do have plenty of money!" etc. What I believe helped him was that he found pure joy in the simple fact of being. That was, according to my hypothesis, when he started loving what he did and doing what he loved: thinking and writing in his free-time. And that helped him become a scientist. Not stubborn thoughts about "already being a scientist", just a love for knowledge, doing the things that he loved doing.

I believe that the most succesful people don't usually think about money a lot. They don't succeed because of their "positive thoughts" that become reality. They succeed because of their love for life itself and because they do the things that they love and love the things that they do.

It really doesn't matter wether one is rich and succesful or poor and, um, "unsuccesful". What matters is how life feels. And life feels good when a person has found the joy of being alive and started doing the things that he or she loves.

[Zenn]

LessieLove, I believe you too assign positive value to being rich and famous as if they were universal desires, which is egocentric. People we consider successful and model after or cite as examples, do not necessarily aim to be rich and/or famous. They attract what they focus on and sometimes for some of them their success/achievements become well known and celebrated.

LOA, if it is a law, is not something one chooses to "use" or not. It just functions indiscriminately, whether or not one is conscious of it. We are all natural at it but we are not happy with the results (our reality) when they are not what we consciously want and so some of us try to "work" it deliberately to attract what we think we want. It works out well, or so it seems to us, for some people who have what we want in abundance and we call them successful. They may or may not have used LOA deliberately and they may or may not be truly successful in that they actually get what they have really wanted.

BTW, Einstein was very spiritual. Read his quotes and you'll realize how much he valued imagination, intuition, etc. above "science". Like many great inventors, he received knowledge and information from the Universe during his daily naps.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by LassieLove

For example, Albert Einstein. He was very depressed and considered himself a failure when he worked at a patent agency.

He did not consider himself a failure when he worked at a patent agency. He was not depressed over his job at the patent agency. He was depressed over his inability to resolve the incompatibility of Newtonian mechanics and Maxwell's equations.

By the way, working as a patent clerk (despite the unglamorous word "clerk") is not a job for idiots. Nowadays we call them "patent examiners". An engineering or science degree is the minimum qualification you need, and many patent examiners would have a masters degree in engineering/science. They will also be given legal training.

To give you an example of what a patent examiner does - one day, he may get a patent application for, let's say, a new type of technology, for example, a new type of device that traps solar power, or detects cancer cells. To decide whether the application should be granted, you actually have to understand this new technology - for trapping solar power, or for detecting cancer cells - and decide whether it is so different from existing patented inventions, that it deserves a patent.

Here are some recent patents approved in the US:

Simulation method for efficient characterization of electronic systems under variability effects
United States Patent 8036870

Abstract: A method of determining the behavior of an electronic system comprising electronic components under variability is disclosed. In one aspect, the method comprises for at least one parameter of at least one of the electronic components, showing variability defining a range and a population of possible values within the range, each possible value having a probability of occurrence, thereby defining an input domain. The method further comprises selecting inputs randomly from the input domain, wherein the probability to sample (PTS) is obtained from the probability of occurrence (PTOIR). The method further comprises performing simulation to obtain the performance parameters of the electronic system, thereby defining an output domain sample. The method further comprises aggregating results of the individual computations into the parameter/variability of the electronic system and assigning a frequency of occurrence (FoO) to the resulting sample, the parameter variability and the frequency of occurrence defining the behavior.

Iontophoretic preparation for treatment of breast cancer and/or mastitis
United States Patent 8034824

Abstract:The present invention is to provide means to treat breast cancer and/or mastitis by topically administering a non-steroidal antiinflammatory analgetic agent and/or an anticancer agent and allowing them efficiently to arrive into the mammary gland. The present invention provides an iontophoretic preparation for treating breast cancer and/or mastitis which contains a non-steroidal antiinflammatory analgetic agent and/or an anticancer agent as an active ingredient and has a donor to be applied on a nipple part for topical administration of the active ingredient from the nipple part to the mammary gland by application of electric potential.

Maize variety hybrid 10034320
United States Patent 8035015

Abstract: A novel maize variety designated 10034320 and seed, plants and plant parts thereof, produced by crossing Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc. proprietary inbred maize varieties. Methods for producing a maize plant that comprises crossing maize variety 10034320 with another maize plant. Methods for producing a maize plant containing in its genetic material one or more traits introgressed into 10034320 through backcross conversion and/or transformation, and to the maize seed, plant and plant part produced thereby. This invention relates to the maize variety 10034320, the seed, the plant produced from the seed, and variants, mutants, and minor modifications of maize variety 10034320. This invention further relates to methods for producing maize varieties derived from maize variety 10034320.

Semiconductor laser driving circuit, and optical disc device and integrated circuit provided with semiconductor laser driving circuit
United States Patent 8036254

Abstract:The output voltage of a cathode drive-type semiconductor laser driving circuit is set to a minimum, power consumption by a driving circuit portion is suppressed, and the heat that is generated by the optical head or the optical disc device is reduced. In addition to a conventional configuration, the semiconductor laser driving circuit of the invention measures the cathode voltage (Vout) of a semiconductor laser (1) and controls the anode voltage (Vld) such that the cathode voltage (Vout) becomes a predetermined level, and by doing so sets the output voltage of the semiconductor laser driving circuit to a predetermined level in order to curtail power consumption by the driving circuit and minimize the rise in temperature of the optical head or the optical disc device.

Being a patent examiner can be a very stimulating & educational environment for a person who is interested in science (as Albert was).

[ChrisGinsburg]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

He did not consider himself a failure when he worked at a patent agency. He was not depressed over his job at the patent agency. He was depressed over his inability to resolve the incompatibility of Newtonian mechanics and Maxwell's equations.

I'm curious how you came to know this as fact?

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by ChrisGinsburg

I'm curious how you came to know this as fact?

Actually I don't. I found the statement in a casual line in a brief article discussing Albert's life.

That period of time (1901 to 1904) had various ups and downs for Einstein. He may have been depressed over other things. For example, this was the time when he got his non-Jewish girlfriend Mileva pregnant, and Einstein's mum objected strongly to them getting married.

Baby Lieserl was born, and Einstein was not there. He wrote many letters. Eventually Lieserl, his illegitimate daughter, died at a young age from scarlet fever.

[LassieLove]

Originally Posted by Zenn

LessieLove, I believe you too assign positive value to being rich and famous as if they were universal desires, which is egocentric.

I personally don't assing much "absolute" positive value to being rich and famous, I've just noticed that a lot of people seem to do that.

People we consider successful and model after or cite as examples, do not necessarily aim to be rich and/or famous. They attract what they focus on and sometimes for some of them their success/achievements become well known and celebrated.

Exactly. That's my point. Einstein didn't aim at becoming rich or famous. He just wanted to pursue doing what he loved.

I've seen some LOA videos on Youtube that are very much focused on money and other shallow things, misleading people to believe that those shallow things actually matter in life. Those videos go on to claim that if you just believe that you have money etc, then you will have money. And then some people are led to think that the best "technique" in becoming succesful in life is to just try very hard to believe untrue claims such as "I have plenty of money" when, in fact, the key in becoming succesful is to simply enjoy life as it is now and to do what you love.

BTW, Einstein was very spiritual. Read his quotes and you'll realize how much he valued imagination, intuition, etc. above "science". Like many great inventors, he received knowledge and information from the Universe during his daily naps.

Yeah, I know he was spiritual.

[LassieLove]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

He did not consider himself a failure when he worked at a patent agency. He was not depressed over his job at the patent agency. He was depressed over his inability to resolve the incompatibility of Newtonian mechanics and Maxwell's equations.

By the way, working as a patent clerk (despite the unglamorous word "clerk") is not a job for idiots. Nowadays we call them "patent examiners". An engineering or science degree is the minimum qualification you need, and many patent examiners would have a masters degree in engineering/science. They will also be given legal training.

Ah, I didn't mean that Einstein considered himself a failure because he worked at a patent agency -- although I personally suspect the job (or not getting a job at a university) had something to do with his negative feelings. After all, it had been very important to his father that he succeed academically and his father had tried very hard to get him a post at a university and was disappointed in his son who turned out to be only "mediocre". So I do believe that it would be strange if Albert wasn't the least bit disappointed in himself, caused by his father's great demands. It's not unusual to try and live up to one's parents' expectations and have negative feelings as one fails.

[Acting Like Godot]

I don't really agree with this either:

Originally Posted by LassieLove

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.

For example, a person's wealth can lead to numerous spin-off benefits for many, many people around him. Including his family; his travel agent; his florist; his property agent; his gardener; his housekeeper; his tailor; and the people who work at all the shops, restaurants etc etc that the wealthy person patronises.

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.

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.

[AndyDufresne]

Most of you here are saying that LOA works best if you already have the feeling of having what you wish for.

Then there are the posts about Einstein whether he did or not use the LOA.

I'm just curious as I know very little about LOA, and I remember reading on an LOA site that visualizing that you have already acheived your goals can hinder your progress, as you won't work as hard to get there if you feel it is already done. Hope that makes sense.

I suppose the two main things mentioned in this thread are strong self-belief and doing what you love, but there's so much contrasting material I'm just trying to get my head around it all.

Hopefully someone can enlighten me or expand on what I'm trying to say, as I'm very new to all this.