Lessons From Ron Lewison (1938-2008) (Blog)

[Savage]

Use this thread to discuss the following entry from Steve Pavlina's blog:

Lessons From Ron Lewison (1938-2008)

[Dan.Linehan]

Congrats on your induction Erin!

[Erin Pavlina]

Thank you, I gave my icebreaker speech last week and am looking forward to trying my hand with the big boys

[raji]

Very loving and inspiring. Just what I needed today. Thank you Steve.

[wulph]

Thank you for sharing a unique portrait of your friend's life, Steve. I especially enjoyed reading about how his influence helped catapult you to success. I will think of him and the lessons you've shared as I work on my courage to complete Toastmasters this time.

[Holistic Star]

Wow - what an article - that was really powerful.

I've got tears running down my face from reading it.

Thank you.

[carenkh]

Thanks, Steve - I was very moved by how you helped him process what had happened to him.

Patti Digh writes a blog called 37 Days. She started it when her stepfather passed away, after being diagnosed with lung cancer 37 days prior to his death. She envisioned it as a collection of things written down for her daughters - advice on how to live consciously in the world. How would you spend your time if you knew you had only 37 days left to live?

Her essays are moving and funny and insightful. She's been writing the blog for several years now, and she just had a book published, called Life is a Verb, of 37 of the essays. In celebration of the publication, she's been posting some of her readers' answers to that question.

It's hard not to think of something like that question when someone close to you dies.

Thanks so much for sharing your story.

[Bud921]

Steve,

I am greatly sorry for your loss. This past year was very difficult for me as well, as I too lost a good friend. I saw him die before me after he was hit by a jet ski. I will never forget his body shaking and his eye's rolled to the back of is head, his body covered in blood, it looked like a over-the-top-action movie. I only knew Marco for a year but in that year I was able to build a connection with him, a connection in which it would normally take years and years to build. Marco was a fun loving guy. He never took life too seriously and was always out to have fun. I remember just after moving to Shanghai, my grades were not where they were supposed to be, and I would always share my worries with him, I can't do this, I won't be able to get into a good school etc. (I have since lost the habit of being negative in regards to my life accomplishments, because I no have no doubt in my mind I will be able to improve the life's of many through my writing.)

Death is a very interesting thing, and for me my friend's death actually sparked my personal development journey. Up and tell that time I pretty much went through the motions , expecting a lot while doing little, but after my friend's death a knew perspective formed. I have always been known to listen and have been known to help people through their problems and I can say honestly that nothing brings me more joy. I am in the process of starting up my own personal development site called aboundlessworld.com I currently have only the domain bought, but I am working to but that online very soon. ( I recently returned to China after a two month vacation in the United States.)

Steve, I can honestly say that your articles have changed my life tremendously and that you have inspired me to do more with my life. I know that I am only a Senior in high school, but I know from the bottom of my heart what I want to do with my life, and I have to give some credit too you, in regards too your articles making me think and fueling a desire to be a better person.

Marco's death was the first death of a friend that I had experienced in my life time and it really hit home. I remember my mother telling me that he had been pronounced dead, and feeling my body just give out beneath me. I began balling my eyes out and asking Why? Why? Why? Over time I came to a realization. That his death, had a PURPOSE. I like to relate his death to dropping a stone in a pond. He created a splash in which every one got wet, but his splash was able to bring hundreds and hundreds of people closer together. I began to love my mom a little more, my dad a little more, my brother a little more, my sister a little more, and through that I was able to see a "positive" in his death. Marco's death also taught me that you never know when it might be your "time" Just the day before me and my brother were out riding jet ski's with him, it could have just as easily been one of us.

About a week before the accident, I had a dream in which Marco got a 85 on his math test.

"Hey, Marco you got an 85 on your math test."

" Shows me his 85"
"Wow man you can predict the future"
" Can you tell me mine?"

"But what if I predict you die?, Ha don't worry you won't die any time soon."

I write this irony not to show that I could possibly have physic abilities ( Which I believe every one can have if they truly focus their intentions.)
but rather to show the ironies in every day life.

It was also interesting to know that the last song on his I-Pod was blood rush to my head- by cold play. He was hit on the head by the jet ski.

Marco's death although the most difficult thing I have ever had to deal with, taught me so much about the world and how life works. Marco's death brought the expat community so close and touched so many people's life's, but unfortunately life continues to move on. Not a day goes by with out my thinking about Marco, and how it was his death that caused me to begin my personal development journey. No matter how bad things may seem, their is always a purpose behind it, and it is up to us as human beings to find it. We must live each day to the best of our abilities, all the while not taking life to seriously because with in a split second your "world" can change. Don't take things for granted. Don't wait to utter the word's "I love you". Get up and do it now.

[Anna Conlan]

Steve, what a beautiful and absorbing post. It brought tears to my eyes.

[laur_454]

Steve, I read everything you post and your articles often seem to be posted exactly when I need to learn something specific. Today was no different. I've been feeling down, unmotivated, and lost for the past couple of weeks, and this post has kind of slapped me back into place. I rarely get emotional when reading your entries, usually I get just fired up to take action. This time I felt a wide range of emotions that will help me enjoy the rest of this evening and wake up feeling positive and wanting to connect with others and make the most of my time here. Thank you Steve! And much love to Ron and his family.

[Matt Willard]

Your posts always manage to keep me focused. I have found my life purpose, thankfully, and though right now I'm trying a low-stress form of productivity, the mindset you presented interests me, and I want to install it when I can to maximize my days.

I'm not sure if I believe in another side or not, but hey, Ron Lewison gets to coach other people in the same boat, and that's pretty awesome. At least he won't be bored.

[Ecce Homo]

"To live in the hearts of those we love is not to die."

~Thomas Campbell

Thank you Steve for sharing this story and thank you Ron for doing your part to help Steve become the great communicator he is today!

[alexb5784]

I am deeply moved by the sincerity of this blog post. Not only was Ron a great mentor to the people he loved when he was alive, but now he's already motivated me now from the Afterlife. Thanks so much for sharing Steve and thanks Ron for being so loving, kind, and generous

[Famous Nabob]

Steve,

With 16,000+ people reading the forum posts, I think it's probably no stretch to say that you are the "Ron" to many of us. Thanks for your continuing inspiration.

[RRR]

I've noticed a lot of your posts have struck a lot of people deeply lately, myself included. I've had tangible reactions to reading them..an odd "this is written just for you" feeling. Also I've had objective improvements, my emotions improve, my gratitude improves, my zest for life is ignited. I've noticed its the articles that feel different seem like they are coming from the heart, ones that feel like you really care about the people you are writing for. This post nearly made me cry, I remember being touched deeply by feeling blessed, the purpose of life, earn your first love dollar, what if I have many interests.., tolerance is resistance to love...And the mention of the joy of sadness put my own life in perspective as I read this post.

I feel I want to contribute here though. I LOVE your articles that feel this way, I take steps towards growth, I have profound realizations, but some of your other articles don't touch me this way. The money ones don't feel loving at all, they feel hurtful or as if you are projecting a lot of negativity.. The "yet another" raw foods update was negative right from the start. I feel really let down when I read these, as if you just aren't feeling the good vibes when you write them.

Perhaps it is my inclination towards love/purpose articles, but I felt much more inspired and they seemed much more eloquent and from the heart. It feels a lot of the time your articles about Skill/productivity/optimization don't have the same heartfelt eloquence. They are textbook, they don't inspire emotion; I can read them an analyze them logically, but I don't feel them. And I feel a lot of the power behind the message in them is lost when I don't feel the love the other articles contain. I consider the life of purpose article recently written a great example of an article I felt a strong connection towards which also had practical application towards monetary development.

Has anyone else felt this way? Is there a way we can help Steve contribute beyond posting our opinions on each article?

[Frans]

Wow, Steve...
Coaching a deceased person...
It seems your "life coaching" program has no boundaries whatsoever.

[LifeBlazing]

Steve,

When I worked as an end-of-life chaplain at a large hospital, I learned that from a former patient. He was surrounded by crying family members, and he scolded them: "Don't you dare cry for me! There are things worse than dying... like living half-way!" Well, that shut everyone up. And caused each of us to look at our lives with a new perspective.

Fast forward five years... to August 17, 2008... when my own precious Grandfather (who was much more like a Father to me) died. He was 100.5. He lived all the way. And so I wonder whether my tears are more for him... or for me?

Losing a loved one is so jarring. It's such a ruthless reality-check. Their End forces us to consider our own. And if we're dawdling in some way... holding our best cards for "later"... playing small... loving small... living small... then the sudden absence of our loved one seems to bring that smallness to surface. It compares their Eternity to our Monday. And the chasm might seem unbridgeable. But it's not. The fragrance, and memories, and lessons and wise/funny sayings they leave behind... these are the stones that build the bridge that connects our earthly Monday to their Heavenly Eternity.

Thank you, Steve, for consoling and inspiring at higher and higher heights.

[DanielBrenton]

Steve --

I thought you would probably say something, and lo and behold ...

Well said, sir. Well said.

And the metaphysical stuff doesn't surprise me -- he had obviously spend some time thinking about the Nature of Things, though I didn't get a chance to hear "the Gospel according to Ron," so to speak.

I was obviously not as close to him as you were, but back in the 2004 Toastmaster spring contest season he is probably the number one reason I won Tall Tales, and he helped me get to the finals for the Humorous season that fall.

Thanks for this,

[Sunnybayes]

yes great article... but I just want to talk about the "Now if you happen to maintain a belief system in which you’ve concluded that communication with the other side is impossible..."

Yes so I'm a skeptic. "I’m sure the skeptics could use the exercise." I guess I step up to the challenge... but I want to believe.

I know that your (people in general) beliefs influence your perception (and a link here too), and therefore logically if you believe that people have the ability to speak to you then you are more likely to interpret your experiences as confirming this belief.

But anyways, I was wondering because it seemed to Steve like Ron had an influence on blackjack, which has a luck component to it, that
if there are people on the other side who can talk to us, like Ron did with Steve, why couldn't they just make it obvious beyond a doubt to the skeptical earthly beings that they can in fact influence us, and that its just not our own believes influencing our perceptions and our interpretations of our experience and reality?

And by that, can anyone ask them to make a statistically significant difference in this world?

Steve said, "Doubling my money would have been outstanding." well... it'd be nice to puts some numbers on that... what's the probability given Steve's ability that he'd be able to do that with or without Ron's help?

"To have it happen again makes it harder to dismiss as a fluke."
Well... n=2.... that's only a sample size of two... to be statistically meaningful... well i guess you'd need a few more trials that n=2. Maybe something like n>5 and n>10 would be great.

What would be great is if Steve could put an end to it all, and ask Ron to participate in a repeatable experiment for us, have a statistically significant influence on reality and let him double his money like 10 times in a row (in a reasonably fast time frame), or some number of trials, so that Steve could win a million to give to the charities, and that we could have statistical confidence of like 70 or 90% sure that in fact Ron was helping Steve out in winning blackjack.

But anyways. Say Steve did the experiment, where first he tried with not asking Ron for help, and then again, he did ask Ron for some help... for 10 or 20 trials and the results turned out to not be statistically meaningful. Does anyone have a guess of why it is against the rules of the people on the other side that they are not allowed to influence physical reality in a statistically significant way, or maybe the reason why they don't want to do so, so that we could in fact be sure that it just wasn't our beliefs that was influencing our interpretation of reality? Do they just get bored with the experiment maybe or don't want to be bossed around, so they go and find something more exciting to do?

[MelissaThinks]

Steve,

My condolences to you and Erin on your loss. Yet like true believers you are finding a way to turn that loss into a gain. That is a true inspiration. This post is a wonderful and loving tribute to your friend and mentor and I'm sure that the very writing of it was extremely comforting to you.

Ron sounds like an awesome person. Thank you for sharing him with us.

[JustBe]

Originally Posted by Sunnybayes

yes great article... but I just want to talk about the "Now if you happen to maintain a belief system in which you’ve concluded that communication with the other side is impossible..."

Yes so I'm a skeptic. "I’m sure the skeptics could use the exercise." I guess I step up to the challenge... but I want to believe.

I know that your (people in general) beliefs influence your perception (and a link here too), and therefore logically if you believe that people have the ability to speak to you then you are more likely to interpret your experiences as confirming this belief.

But anyways, I was wondering because it seemed to Steve like Ron had an influence on blackjack, which has a luck component to it, that
if there are people on the other side who can talk to us, like Ron did with Steve, why couldn't they just make it obvious beyond a doubt to the skeptical earthly beings that they can in fact influence us, and that its just not our own believes influencing our perceptions and our interpretations of our experience and reality?

And by that, can anyone ask them to make a statistically significant difference in this world?

Steve said, "Doubling my money would have been outstanding." well... it'd be nice to puts some numbers on that... what's the probability given Steve's ability that he'd be able to do that with or without Ron's help?

"To have it happen again makes it harder to dismiss as a fluke."
Well... n=2.... that's only a sample size of two... to be statistically meaningful... well i guess you'd need a few more trials that n=2. Maybe something like n>5 and n>10 would be great.

What would be great is if Steve could put an end to it all, and ask Ron to participate in a repeatable experiment for us, have a statistically significant influence on reality and let him double his money like 10 times in a row (in a reasonably fast time frame), or some number of trials, so that Steve could win a million to give to the charities, and that we could have statistical confidence of like 70 or 90% sure that in fact Ron was helping Steve out in winning blackjack.

But anyways. Say Steve did the experiment, where first he tried with not asking Ron for help, and then again, he did ask Ron for some help... for 10 or 20 trials and the results turned out to not be statistically meaningful. Does anyone have a guess of why it is against the rules of the people on the other side that they are not allowed to influence physical reality in a statistically significant way, or maybe the reason why they don't want to do so, so that we could in fact be sure that it just wasn't our beliefs that was influencing our interpretation of reality? Do they just get bored with the experiment maybe or don't want to be bossed around, so they go and find something more exciting to do?

I don't think those 'statics' will apply with this material .

An uncle of mine did get 7 years extra after cancer was determined and 'scientific medical world' predicted he 'statiscly' had not more than 3 months to live.

He got those extra years based on his life. He served poor people during his life. Based on his life.....

So, I am almost sure in any case the context must be so that it must serve (more than one) people for good. Repititions will not have this context.

As far as I am concerned it would be more usefull to learn the skills to channel than making those experiments to statistically proof the existence.

[Bud921]

The ability to see spirits is a very controversial topic and rightfully so. Those who have an open mind will have a greater chance of being able to see a "spirit" than those who are skeptical. Skepticism kills all the possibility of seeing a spirit. Your mind controls whither or not you will be able to see them. If you do not believe in your mind that spirits can exist your mind won't show them to you. Personally, I believe spirits do indeed exist, but only to people who believe in them. I find it very hypocritical that many Christians down play the possibility of spirits and such when they believe in God. If you believe in something it then becomes real in your mind, therefor to any one who truly believes in spirits, will be able to see them. Perspective is everything. To those who don't believe in spirits and the afterlife that is your right,but I think it is a little out of line to poke fun at those who do.

[supertom]

i remember erin saying that the higher self is who you are in the ether, but "ron" seemed confused, why wasnt he able to meet with his higherself??

[Gavin]

I really enjoyed the positive slant of this sensitive topic. Well done Steve.

I found it particularly resonated with me because the last thing I wrote last night was a 'Carpe Diem-esque' note to myself about the fragility of life and the enormity of potential.

[Erin Pavlina]

Originally Posted by supertom

i remember erin saying that the higher self is who you are in the ether, but "ron" seemed confused, why wasnt he able to meet with his higherself??

When a person crosses over they don't immediately merge into their higher consciousness state. This post will explain some of that.

Crossing Over

Especially when the death was unexpected, it can take a while for a spirit to even realize what's happened to him.

[mncz]

I actually cried while reading this post
The "seize the day instead of worrying about your bills" part really resonated with me. You see, yesterday I finally received the first part of the money from my office sale, quite a large sum. What baffled me these two days was how I felt about it. You see, I was waiting for this to happen for so long. Finally I was able to pay off all the debt I had stacked up the last few years, and I still could afford a lot of shinies. Moreover, there will be more money coming later from this deal. I should feel happy, right? I should be jumping with joy. Well, I feel nothing like that.

In my heart, I still feel poor, perhaps even poorer than before. I have this thought in my mind that tells me to sit on that money and never let it go, even if it means avoiding all the little things that delight me. The fear to be poor again is just overwhelming. My mother offered me to go to Spain to see Alhambra which I have always wanted to see, and I really considered refusing the trip just because of the costs!

This post was just what I needed to read to begin liberating myself from this fear. Many thanks.

[Savage]

Originally Posted by Sunnybayes

But anyways, I was wondering because it seemed to Steve like Ron had an influence on blackjack, which has a luck component to it, that
if there are people on the other side who can talk to us, like Ron did with Steve, why couldn't they just make it obvious beyond a doubt to the skeptical earthly beings that they can in fact influence us, and that its just not our own believes influencing our perceptions and our interpretations of our experience and reality?

It's part of the nature of our earthly existence that we're free to choose our beliefs. This part of our free will means we can't be given proof of something that we've chosen to belief is false. We can only see what's in a new room when we willingly step through the door.

Since you've stepped through the door of skepticism, your experience will be subject to the conditions of that room. This basically means you'll interpret everything I would write as a result of confirmation bias.

There's nothing wrong with that. I have no interest in changing your mind because that wouldn't be fair to you. You've chosen your current beliefs for a reason -- because that's what you're here to experience at this point in time.

So from your perspective, you're absolutely right. At this point you cannot be given experiences that would violate the conditions of the room you're in. You'd have to step into a different room for that to occur, but this can only be done by choice. If you continue to interpret your experiences through the lens of skepticism, you'll never be shown anything that would violate your beliefs. You can only be shown things like this third-party story that give you the freedom to dismiss it as confirmation bias.

Again, this is fine. When you're ready to progress beyond skepticism, simply recognize that holding the lens of skepticism is a choice, not an obligation, and take note that you're free to explore other lenses without losing yourself in them.

You are not a skeptic. You're simply holding the lens of skepticism.

[Savage]

Originally Posted by Sunnybayes

But anyways. Say Steve did the experiment, where first he tried with not asking Ron for help, and then again, he did ask Ron for some help... for 10 or 20 trials and the results turned out to not be statistically meaningful. Does anyone have a guess of why it is against the rules of the people on the other side that they are not allowed to influence physical reality in a statistically significant way, or maybe the reason why they don't want to do so, so that we could in fact be sure that it just wasn't our beliefs that was influencing our interpretation of reality? Do they just get bored with the experiment maybe or don't want to be bossed around, so they go and find something more exciting to do?

It isn't against the rules for spirits/entities on the other side to influence reality in a statistically significant way.

It is, however, against the rules for your reality to bring you experiences that violate your freedom to choose your own beliefs.

So you'll never see such an experiment conducted in a way that convinces you to change your mind... at least not until after you've willingly changed your mind on your own.

If I reported such an experiment in great detail and with great success, your subconscious wouldn't let you see it. Either you'd miss that article completely, or you'd read it and save it for later and forget to get back to it, or you'd read it and interpret it in some inaccurate way, finding a way to dismiss it without ever looking into it further. Your own subconscious would literally stop you from seeing what you believe is impossible. That's a barrier you cannot cross except by conscious choice.

[newmark]

A moving and interesting article.

[supertom]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

It isn't against the rules for spirits/entities on the other side to influence reality in a statistically significant way.

It is, however, against the rules for your reality to bring you experiences that violate your freedom to choose your own beliefs.

So you'll never see such an experiment conducted in a way that convinces you to change your mind... at least not until after you've willingly changed your mind on your own.

If I reported such an experiment in great detail and with great success, your subconscious wouldn't let you see it. Either you'd miss that article completely, or you'd read it and save it for later and forget to get back to it, or you'd read it and interpret it in some inaccurate way, finding a way to dismiss it without ever looking into it further. Your own subconscious would literally stop you from seeing what you believe is impossible. That's a barrier you cannot cross except by conscious choice.

Hey, so how can I be totally OPEN, say when im reading, there might be greater truths that im blocking out. im rading abraham again and im seeing it totally differently this time, that 99% of people wont see