|
Post by tzujanli on Jul 2, 2013 10:12:50 GMT -5
Greetings.. Sorry, I have no idea what "use LOA" looks like, so I can't agree to it. This is the first time we've gone in a circle. In order to not go in a circle again, you would need to spell out what "use LOA" looks like. In this game, all I can tell you is that in 'using LOA' there would be no harm to yourself or anyone, in any way, shape or form. And the guarantee is unconditional happiness. Based on that, what would make a difference as to whether you said 'yes or no'? If no harm to self or others is guaranteed, what WOULD stop you from saying 'yes'? Tell me what would stop you saying 'yes', and maybe I can incorporate it into the game. LOA is a repackaged version of "The Power of Positive Thinking", i.e.: common sense.. it is the alignment of personal energies with the energies of the condition desired.. but, "faith without works is dead", the desirer must conduct their life 'as if' the desired is so.. add some sincere gratitude, and, the odds favor the desire.. LOA, "The Secret", manifested their $$ desire through the 'works' of publishing a book.. Be well..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2013 10:13:51 GMT -5
My question about the vocabulary wasn't about your experience. You use those words and associate those sensations with ideas in order to make yourself heard and understood and from your perspective those words describe the phenomenon. My question was about this association. When I said that here was an underlying belief at play I was referring to an assumption that's woven into the culture that you learned your language from. My use of the exact word 'vibration' here has been mostly in relaying Abraham Hicks Teachings....that is indeed the precise word they use. My preferred word is 'energy'.....and as I shared, from the time I was a child, I could palpably 'feel' this energy, so when I spoke of 'buzzing' or 'humming' sensations coursing through my body, it was not a 'learned' language at all, but rather a reporting of what was actually being experienced. There was no 'assumption' woven into that experience due to a culture.....I was at an age where there had not yet been exposure to such language. I'm simply relaying my take on LOA......I do see that on this subject, many have jumped on the bandwagon of what are actually much deeper teachings to candy-coat the message and offer simplistic solutions. While the precise term 'Law of Attraction' may be relatively new, Teachings about the relationship between thought and form/experience, are not. The more in-depth teachings/messages are not really geared towards 'getting stuff' at all. Two that come to mind in this vein are Neville Goddard and the Seth material by Jane Roberts.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jul 2, 2013 10:18:14 GMT -5
Greetings.. In this game, all I can tell you is that in 'using LOA' there would be no harm to yourself or anyone, in any way, shape or form. And the guarantee is unconditional happiness. Based on that, what would make a difference as to whether you said 'yes or no'? If no harm to self or others is guaranteed, what WOULD stop you from saying 'yes'? Tell me what would stop you saying 'yes', and maybe I can incorporate it into the game. LOA is a repackaged version of "The Power of Positive Thinking", i.e.: common sense.. it is the alignment of personal energies with the energies of the condition desired.. but, "faith without works is dead", the desirer must conduct their life 'as if' the desired is so.. add some sincere gratitude, and, the odds favor the desire.. LOA, "The Secret", manifested their $$ desire through the 'works' of publishing a book.. Be well.. Ya. It hasn't escaped my notice that many that have made a lot of money using LOA seem to have made it from selling books on the subject! Nevertheless, I would testify to it's efficacy.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jul 2, 2013 10:22:16 GMT -5
Greetings.. LOA is a repackaged version of "The Power of Positive Thinking", i.e.: common sense.. it is the alignment of personal energies with the energies of the condition desired.. but, "faith without works is dead", the desirer must conduct their life 'as if' the desired is so.. add some sincere gratitude, and, the odds favor the desire.. LOA, "The Secret", manifested their $$ desire through the 'works' of publishing a book.. Be well.. Ya. It hasn't escaped my notice that many that have made a lot of money using LOA seem to have made it from selling books on the subject! Nevertheless, I would testify to it's efficacy. "How to Make Ten Million Dollars Writing Books Telling People How to Make Ten Million Dollars"
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jul 2, 2013 10:32:30 GMT -5
The answer to your question is a fundamental no. Anything that can be brought can be taken away or lost. Okay, forget that word. If LOA guaranteed you unconditional happiness, would you use it? * contains misconceptions *
|
|
|
Post by topology on Jul 2, 2013 10:53:30 GMT -5
Sorry, I have no idea what "use LOA" looks like, so I can't agree to it. This is the first time we've gone in a circle. In order to not go in a circle again, you would need to spell out what "use LOA" looks like. In this game, all I can tell you is that in 'using LOA' there would be no harm to yourself or anyone, in any way, shape or form. And the guarantee is unconditional happiness. Based on that, what would make a difference as to whether you said 'yes or no'? If no harm to self or others is guaranteed, what WOULD stop you from saying 'yes'? Tell me what would stop you saying 'yes', and maybe I can incorporate it into the game. circle number 2. I just don't take assurances on faith and I have to know the mechanics of how things work. Let's look at it this way: Saying Yes would mean building up an expectation of receiving unconditional happiness through the process. I see no value in building up that expectation. If LOA were anything like energy work or practicing self-awareness or sitting in silence, I could experiment with LOA with no expectation to see what it is and does, but I can't agree to do it under the expectation that it will bring me unconditional happiness. Setting up that expectation creates a condition on happiness.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jul 2, 2013 11:37:20 GMT -5
In this game, all I can tell you is that in 'using LOA' there would be no harm to yourself or anyone, in any way, shape or form. And the guarantee is unconditional happiness. Based on that, what would make a difference as to whether you said 'yes or no'? If no harm to self or others is guaranteed, what WOULD stop you from saying 'yes'? Tell me what would stop you saying 'yes', and maybe I can incorporate it into the game. circle number 2. I just don't take assurances on faith and I have to know the mechanics of how things work. Let's look at it this way: Saying Yes would mean building up an expectation of receiving unconditional happiness through the process. I see no value in building up that expectation. If LOA were anything like energy work or practicing self-awareness or sitting in silence, I could experiment with LOA with no expectation to see what it is and does, but I can't agree to do it under the expectation that it will bring me unconditional happiness. Setting up that expectation creates a condition on happiness. That's fine in the real world that you don't take assurances on faith. But this is just a hypothetical. A game. Unconditional happiness is guaranteed if you use LOA. Based on what you said here, it sounds like you wouldn't do it because you perceive there would be some kind of harm to you, but I have ruled out any harm. Let me put it another way. What I am proposing is akin to Aladdin's lamp/genie. If the genie in the lamp could give you unconditional happiness, would you rub the lamp and ask the genie?
|
|
|
Post by topology on Jul 2, 2013 12:06:37 GMT -5
circle number 2. I just don't take assurances on faith and I have to know the mechanics of how things work. Let's look at it this way: Saying Yes would mean building up an expectation of receiving unconditional happiness through the process. I see no value in building up that expectation. If LOA were anything like energy work or practicing self-awareness or sitting in silence, I could experiment with LOA with no expectation to see what it is and does, but I can't agree to do it under the expectation that it will bring me unconditional happiness. Setting up that expectation creates a condition on happiness. That's fine in the real world that you don't take assurances on faith. But this is just a hypothetical. A game. Unconditional happiness is guaranteed if you use LOA. Based on what you said here, it sounds like you wouldn't do it because you perceive there would be some kind of harm to you, but I have ruled out any harm. Let me put it another way. What I am proposing is akin to Aladdin's lamp/genie. If the genie in the lamp could give you unconditional happiness, would you rub the lamp and ask the genie?
If we're going to do an all out break from reality and there was no Monkey Paw business, If I had a magic lamp with a genie in it and could get anything, I would ask for that. Yes.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jul 2, 2013 12:37:25 GMT -5
That's fine in the real world that you don't take assurances on faith. But this is just a hypothetical. A game. Unconditional happiness is guaranteed if you use LOA. Based on what you said here, it sounds like you wouldn't do it because you perceive there would be some kind of harm to you, but I have ruled out any harm. Let me put it another way. What I am proposing is akin to Aladdin's lamp/genie. If the genie in the lamp could give you unconditional happiness, would you rub the lamp and ask the genie?
If we're going to do an all out break from reality and there was no Monkey Paw business, If I had a magic lamp with a genie in it and could get anything, I would ask for that. Yes. Okay, thanks. I've forgotten why I asked now hehe. Hmmm. I'd like to keep going if you're up for it. It seems you have no issue with asking for something and then being given that something. Would you agree, that in reality, that you are more likely to be happy doing work that inspires you than work that doesn't inspire you? Would you agree, that in reality, that you are more likely to be happy in a relationship with a woman that shares your values to a great extent than with a woman that doesn't share your values hardly at all?
|
|
|
Post by topology on Jul 2, 2013 12:46:24 GMT -5
If we're going to do an all out break from reality and there was no Monkey Paw business, If I had a magic lamp with a genie in it and could get anything, I would ask for that. Yes. Okay, thanks. I've forgotten why I asked now hehe. Hmmm. I'd like to keep going if you're up for it. It seems you have no issue with asking for something and then being given that something. Would you agree, that in reality, that you are more likely to be happy doing work that inspires you than work that doesn't inspire you? Would you agree, that in reality, that you are more likely to be happy in a relationship with a woman that shares your values to a great extent than with a woman that doesn't share your values hardly at all? Too much mental presupposition to even answer these questions in any kind of honest way. How am I suppose to know whether or not I am content/happy in a situation by thinking about it instead of being in it? Which values are being shared and not shared? I've often found that with respect to work, inspiration vanishes when the mud has to be slogged through. And what happened to your dangling the guarantee and now we are working with "more likely". Do you know how many dead ends I've trapped myself in because I was following my sense of "more likely?". Fallacious reasoning going on.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jul 2, 2013 12:51:32 GMT -5
Okay, thanks. I've forgotten why I asked now hehe. Hmmm. I'd like to keep going if you're up for it. It seems you have no issue with asking for something and then being given that something. Would you agree, that in reality, that you are more likely to be happy doing work that inspires you than work that doesn't inspire you? Would you agree, that in reality, that you are more likely to be happy in a relationship with a woman that shares your values to a great extent than with a woman that doesn't share your values hardly at all? Too much mental presupposition to even answer these questions in any kind of honest way. How am I suppose to know whether or not I am content/happy in a situation by thinking about it instead of being in it? Which values are being shared and not shared? I've often found that with respect to work, inspiration vanishes when the mud has to be slogged through. And what happened to your dangling the guarantee and now we are working with "more likely". Do you know how many dead ends I've trapped myself in because I was following my sense of "more likely?". Fallacious reasoning going on. Okay, let me try again. I am assuming that you are happy to ask and to be given what you ask for. If a genie came out of a lamp and said 'Top, I am giving you the choice between work that will consistently inspire you, and work that won't, which will you choose? I am also giving you the choice between a relationship with a woman that you will consistently adore, and a woman that you will have no particular feeling towards either way, which will you choose?' You are also free to choose neither.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jul 2, 2013 12:56:05 GMT -5
Hmmm. Just realized the similarity between Andrew's Genie, and the Biblical 'Devil' who tempted Jesus in the desert.
Fascinating.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jul 2, 2013 12:58:29 GMT -5
Hmmm. Just realized the similarity between Andrew's Genie, and the Biblical 'Devil' who tempted Jesus in the desert. Fascinating. I don't know the story fully, but I can imagine there is a similarity. The question then is, do we reject the devil, or accept the devil?
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jul 2, 2013 13:03:34 GMT -5
Hmmm. Just realized the similarity between Andrew's Genie, and the Biblical 'Devil' who tempted Jesus in the desert. Fascinating. I don't know the story fully, but I can imagine there is a similarity. The question then is, do we reject the devil, or accept the devil? ... or ignore him, or dismiss him ... ? At the risk of sounding like E, the question sounds ... misconceived.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jul 2, 2013 13:05:06 GMT -5
I don't know the story fully, but I can imagine there is a similarity. The question then is, do we reject the devil, or accept the devil? ... or ignore him, or dismiss him ... ? At the risk of sounding like E, the question sounds ... misconceived. And just like when E says it, it sounds like a cop out statement! I would say that to ignore and dismiss is to reject, rather than accept or allow.
|
|