reply to post by yeahright
As i hope I've communicated previously in the thread, I believe there's much of value in things like The Secret, although it's neither a secret, or
mysterious or unique to the works of Rhonda Byrne.
People attribute LOA to the Secret, because it's Pop culture and in collective consciousness. This stuff goes way back
The problem I have is attributing things to The Secret, or any of the other self-help tools out there that they can't possibly be responsible for.
At this point, you can't know whether or not it's legit. I can prove it to you, by manifesting 10 consecutive things in a row ...but then there will
be someone that says, "Ok, we need to take another person and have them manifest the same things to see if it happens" ....or say, oh that's just
luck or coincidence, etc. The excuses and skepticism can continue for eons.
Assuming a causal relationship to everything with a demonstrated correlation is superstition.
That's an absolute statement, so your wrong at this point in time to say that. We don't have enough knowledge in this yet to say one way or the
other. 150 years ago, a horseless carriage was considered "superstition," and now we all use combustion engines.
A black cat crossed my path, and a bus hit me. Correlation. Was there causation? Believe what you want, but I'm going to say the events weren't
You would say the events weren't related based on you're current relative view of reality. There are others who directly experience that everything
effects everything else. Who's right? Who's relative?
Where things like The Secret (and other numerous similar strategies) get shortchanged is people believe they'll do something they just aren't going
to do. And these anecdotal, if not apocryphal stories show up that seem to demonstrate a causal effect between really, really wanting to win the
lottery and then it happening.
It's not about "wanting," but about believing you have already won it. In my experience it's legit.
Just for grins, what I'd like to see is substantive proof in advance of the event occurring that someone manifested something like a lottery hit. Not
after the fact where someone hit for $112 mil THEN said, "I totally manifested that".
What is she getting out of telling everyone she used LOA to win the Lotto? It all depends on her motivation. I'm sure if it's legit, we'll find the
receipt or library records of her getting these books, the vision board she drew, etc.
What does she benefit out of telling people she used LOA to win the lotto? She doesn't have any books to sell, no products, no anything.
Naturally, for it to be considered 'proof' (for me, anyway) it would have to be replicable.
IS losing your virginity replicable? Only happens 1 time and you experience it and know it directly, yet it cannot be replicated.
There are experiments in science, where the outcome is never the same, thus the only part that is replicable, is the different outcomes. They call
these "anomalies", but some things, by their very nature, can never be replicated. Take existence. This single moment right now, is gone a second
later. Can't be replicated, yet it existed.
The Secret is a good thing, for what it is. But it ain't gonna effect the laws of chance or physics.
Who says they effect the laws of chance or physics? Perhaps its the other way around. The Laws of Chance/Physics are not yet completely understood,
therefore, those who successfully use LOA to manifest things are also not fully understood.
Considering the Observer effects reality, means we're on to something not fully understood yet. Did you read the random number generator article?
According to standard materialist science, the laws of chance are mathematically set in stone, and there shouldn't, or rather aren't any effects on
the chances based on the Observer. Yet we have this:
During the late 1970s, Professor Jahn hauled strangers off the street and asked them to concentrate their minds on a number generator. In effect, he
was asking them to try to make it flip more heads than tails. It was a preposterous idea at the time, and to many it still is.
The results, however, were stunning and have never been satisfactorily explained. Again and again, entirely ordinary people proved that their minds
could influence the machines and produce significant fluctuations on the graph. According to all of the known laws of science, this should not have
happened - but it did. And it kept on happening.
But those "Laws" of Physics/Chance say that for now this is an anomaly, when in reality, this should be part of the laws of chance and physics
...the observer effect.
Science is still in its infancy. It doesn;t yet know everything there is to know.