Does the typical 'You create your own reality' belief system have an inherent contradiction?

originally posted by: 5StarOracle
For this to be a feasible reality...

I would be existing alone in the void and everything else including all of you, would be nothing more than figments of my imagination...

Now if you identify as someone with a spiritual side, be it religious, new age or individual then this sounds like the kind of reality you'd want to avoid. If your atheist then it sounds like a one way ticket to depression.

The spirit is something that is missing in almost all applications of these ideas. It not so simple to practice these things and expect results because your spirit isn't connected to source. (or god) if that isn't raised your talking to silent universe as the song says.

a reply to: Profusion

I think there is an inherent misunderstanding of the term.."you create your own reality".

I'm a firm believer in the mentioned paradigm...but not in a sense most of you probably think.

The one thing that needs to be mentioned...you do not literally create reality around you...but what you do create is a feeling of reference towards that reality that surrounds you.

Controling one's own feeelings towards objective reality that surrounds you...is literally creating your own understanding of said reality...and all the bells and whistles that come with it.

One can cry or laugh at a funeral...it really depends on your inner workings and understanding of the mechanisms of life.

In that sense...I really do create my own reality.

a reply to: Profusion
The way I have always interpreted it is that you create your "own" version of reality. Through your thought patterns, your knowledge, belief system, education etc... this is why people interpret the world in different ways, have different wants and needs etc... Or "see" things differently.
The law of attraction is nothing more than the law of cause and effect, we can effect our reality by various actions, which will produce either desired or undesired effects, we can learn through these effects what actions we should take for a desirable outcome and thus, create our own more desirable reality.

If I'm creating my own reality, why are there four people in front of me in the queue for the toilets?

Well the "elite", along with the other 7+ billion people all create our reality, so to me the statement ("We create are own reality") is (Very ego-driven) bull#, because it just contradicts...well, reality. If everyone created his own reality, then everyone would live in a parallel universe where he's the only one existing person. On the other hand, most people wouldn't like to be alone, so their reality, the way they really want it, is impossible. Because it involves people aroud us behaving the way we feel is right (And again, other people's behaviour is more or less beyond our control).

its not that simple. the system is based around probability. what the probability you'll get in a car crash. the system can manipulate these values if it sees fit. so can you. you always think about crashing your car your raise the probability it'll happen(creating your own reality).

originally posted by: AVoiceOfReason
its not that simple. the system is based around probability. what the probability you'll get in a car crash. the system can manipulate these values if it sees fit. so can you. you always think about crashing your car your raise the probability it'll happen(creating your own reality).

And yet you don't need to think about crashing to have someone crashing their car into your.

Actually if there is some law of attraction, to me it seems like it works the opposite way. The less you think about something, the more likely it is to happen.

originally posted by: Astyanax
If I'm creating my own reality, why are there four people in front of me in the queue for the toilets?

while you were busy creating your own reality...Murphy's law intervened

a reply to: mkpetrov

yeah... probability. are you drunk or tired? probability of crashing your car goes up. but its always there in varying states no matter what.

that's up to probability. also just because you aren't thinking something doesn't mean you aren't thinking something. ya know. dreams and subconscious. but that's another story. but sure you might not be actively seeking a high paying job, have no interest in having money, but you end up with one. why is up for debate and doesn't really matter. it could have been random probability, could have been someone else affecting probability for you, or whatever.

If you want some philosophical insight I would read Kant's critique of pure reason. It was conisdered a "Copernican revolution.

By Kant's account, when one employs a concept to describe or categorizenoumena (the objects of inquiry, investigation or analysis of the workings of the world), one is employing a way of describing or categorizing phenomena(the observable manifestations of those objects of inquiry, investigation or analysis). Kant posited methods by which human understanding makes sense of and thus intuits phenomena that appear to the mind: the concepts of the transcendental aesthetic, as well as that of the transcendental analytic,transcendental logic and transcendental deduction.[8][9][10] Taken together, Kant's "categories of understanding" are the principles of the human mind which necessarily are brought to bear in attempting to understand the world in which we exist (that is, to understand, or attempt to understand, "things in themselves"). In each instance the word "transcendental" refers to the process that the human mind must exercise to understand or grasp the form of, and order among, phenomena.
In modern philosophical use, the term 'phenomena' has come to mean 'what is experienced is the basis of reality'. In Immanuel Kant's Inaugural Dissertation, On the Form and Principles of the Sensible and Intelligible World (1770), Kant theorizes that the human mind is restricted to the logical world and thus can only interpret and understand occurrences according to their physical appearances. He wrote that humans could infer only as much as their senses allowed, but not experience the actual object itself. Thus, the term phenomenon refers to any incident deserving of inquiry and investigation, especially events that are particularly unusual or of distinctive importance.

If I am creating my own reality, then are you just a figment of my imagination? And, if you are, and I feel you are not serving me any purpose, can I just get rid of you? We are co-creators, meaning that together, humanity has a part to play in our reality. but individually, no, other's desires, whims, wants, and deeds can and do effect us.

originally posted by: Profusion
If the statement "you can create the reality you want" is true then people

If that was true, then everyone would be rich, have every gadget in the universe and not have to work for a living.

We chose our life paths before we were born. The goal is to love everyone and everything and not hold any grudges against anyone and anything.

The peasants that live today are a stubborn bunch which is why they are getting so much crap thrown at them.

a reply to: Profusion

I am quite surprised and somewhat disapointed that so many people posting seem to go off the track.

I believe that we can create our own reality. However, it does not mean that we create each moment on a minute by minute basis or that we can fully get rid of all obstacles in life at the click of the fingers whenever they present themselves.

Creating our own reality means attracting the circumstances that we wish ; making it happen; creating opportunities "out of thin air" as it were.

Creating reality does not mean that we make a queue suddenly disappear or that we get everything that we wish. It means that we create the circumatances around us that we want. There will always be others who have their needs. It is just a matter of working in this competitive situation. When you applied for your last job and got it , did you ever feel anything towards the seven other people that were interviewed and did not get the job ? Probably not.

The point that I am making is that it is a battle of wills in a competitive scenario. Those with a strong will and the ability to imagine success (without an ounce of doubt) will always be the winners.

I used to find it difficult to understand why some of the filthy rich and successful people seem to despise and show contempt towards the less fortunate ones. Now , I think I can see their point (to some extent). The way some of them see it is that even the less fortunate had the same opportunities but just did not take it or simply could not imagine anything beyond a self-established mental ceiling. However, I do recognise that there are those who are truly unfortunate (for example , living in a war zone) where it is very difficult to create your own reality.

Perhaps the point to make here is that you need to do your best and attract the best circumstances for yourself. Millions of minds are desiring things; one man's win is another man's loss- a 'dog eat dog' world it seems. The whole irony of it is that there is enough out there for everybody. The material world is a "Horn of plenty". There is no limit to what can be created.

We could all be rich but who would bring mail to our doorstep ? ; open a shop so that we can go buy milk and groceries; clean the lavatories? etc. It would appear that, in a twist of fate, the competitive structure of our society has a kind of darwinian "selective selection" process. The winners are the ones that have faith in themselves; understand the workings of the mind and attune their will to the universal will (whether done consciously or not)

a reply to: crowdedskies

I agree with you mostly but felt compelled to point out some things:

I used to find it difficult to understand why some of the filthy rich and successful people seem to despise and show contempt towards the less fortunate ones.

Success isn't defined by how wealthy you are, nor a valid reason to show contempt to others who don't define themselves by wealth. As I'm sure you know deep down.

one man's win is another man's loss- a 'dog eat dog' world it seems.

The whole irony of it is that there is enough out there for everybody.

You are contradicting yourself here in the same paragraph, luckily ones mans trash is another mans treasure

We could all be rich but who would bring mail to our doorstep ? ; open a shop so that we can go buy milk and groceries; clean the lavatories? etc

How could we all be rich if the majority have to do the poor paid jobs you've just highlighted?
thankfully not everyone desires to be rich, most would settle for just being happy.

a reply to: Profusion

Unless you are me that is

originally posted by: surfer_soul
a reply to: crowdedskies

I agree with you mostly but felt compelled to point out some things:

Thank you but it would have been better to skip the insignificant points below. You know the Skeptic army feeds on every little point .

You are contradicting yourself here in the same paragraph

No i'm not. I said "it seems" then emphasised : "ironically it is not"

How could we all be rich if the majority have to do the poor paid jobs you've just highlighted?
thankfully not everyone desires to be rich, most would settle for just being happy.

We can all be rich in theory but it would not work. There has to be a hierarchy(eg someone producing the food that we need to live on) It is really which part of the hierarchy you want to be in. If you are happy where you are , then fine. At least you have exercised your will to create the minimum security for your family(at the expense of others, dare I say).

It is all very well to say :"I just want to be happy" and be a good person. Well , I have news for you. Even someone who asks for little but happiness would have pushed others out of his/her path many times (quite brutally and without even being aware of it).

a reply to: crowdedskies

The problem with this, is we are not all created equal. If we were all powerful enough to manifest our wants and desires I wander what would happen.

Maybe it explains the pyramids, there construction anyway.

originally posted by: auraofblack
a reply to: crowdedskies

The problem with this, is we are not all created equal. If we were all powerful enough to manifest our wants and desires I wander what would happen.

Maybe it explains the pyramids, there construction anyway.

Absolutely spot on. All equal but some more equal than others.

I was seeing pyramids whilst writing my last post.

In isolation
"Man is the measure of all things that are, that they are, that are not, that they are not"
Shared reality produces conflicts.
Usually the creation of a reality that assimilates the best causes that reality to be considered "true".
Who said "Resistance Is Futile"?

a reply to: Kandinsky

Humans are unceasingly attempting reality modification (mostly through technology and through mass self-delusion).

What the Idjits as a whole don't realize is that the "entire universe" votes for reality too (such as the laws of physics).

The "Universe" always wins.

Kev