|
|
Post by Reefs on Feb 17, 2024 7:45:22 GMT -5
Given benefit of the doubt, those who biuld appreciable muscle without resistance exercise (+ nutrition) are so few that they don't even register statistically, so obviously these idea about beliefs are incongruent with observable reality. On the other hand, completely regardless of what anyone believes, adequate volumes of resistance training coupled with appropriate nutrition will stimulate muscle growth with a statistical significance of near enough 100%. When I state the obvious to support a claim that is self-evident I conclude I'm wasting my time on nonsense. You have a formal logical error in your reasoning again, Lolly. How many can actually do it is totally irrelevant to the question if it can be done at all. Statistics only reflect what the majority believes and therefore manifests. So 'observable reality' is what the majority around you is manifesting, i.e. Joe and Jane Consensus Trance. And JCT's obviously manifest the CT belief system. Also, as I've just explained, 'observable reality' for you, Lolly, is only what LOA allows you to observe, based on your current beliefs (which are 100% CT). So, of course, anything that goes counter the CT belief system will seem nonsensical to someone who buys 100% into the CT belief system, like you. So in order to get results, you have to do what the CT belief system tells you to do, because for you, nothing else will work. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Feb 17, 2024 9:25:45 GMT -5
It's always about beliefs in the end. Even for Lolly. Because the basic rule is that you have to be a vibrational match to your desire. That's the only requirement. So how can Lolly become a vibrational match to his desire? He believes that he has to do x amount of physical action in order to get x amount of manifestation. So his desire will not manifest until he has done x amount of physical action. Once he has done that, he will be in vibrational alignment with his desire and it will manifest, thereby proving to him that his beliefs are correct. that that's how it works. No pain no gain. And since everybody else that Lolly knows and observers believes the same, they all have to do x amount of physical action in order to get x amount of manifestation. So everyone in Lolly's experience is reinforcing Lolly's belief that only x amount of physical action can get you x amount of manifestation. So Lolly then concludes that his method actually works and is also scientific, because it is replicable and repeatable with others, and just look at the statistics! What Lolly doesn't understand though is that with a different kind of belief system (mental training!), it would require an entirely different kind or a different amount of action to get x amount of manifestation. Now, how do the yogis become a vibrational match to their desires? By pure focus and concentration. No physical action required. That's the direct, the easy way. So in the end, it's all about beliefs and how to bridge them, both for Lolly and the yogis. No difference. The difference is in how to bridge them. For those mired in the common sense consensus trance, it usually is the no pain no gain route, for those free from those limiting collective beliefs, it usually is the miracle route of instant manifestations. So these are the two extreme ends of how to become a vibrational match to one's desires.
|
|
|
|
Post by DonHelado on Feb 17, 2024 10:13:53 GMT -5
Given benefit of the doubt, those who biuld appreciable muscle without resistance exercise (+ nutrition) are so few that they don't even register statistically, so obviously these idea about beliefs are incongruent with observable reality. On the other hand, completely regardless of what anyone believes, adequate volumes of resistance training coupled with appropriate nutrition will stimulate muscle growth with a statistical significance of near enough 100%. When I state the obvious to support a claim that is self-evident I conclude I'm wasting my time on nonsense. Even if such people were rare, but existed, you also have to believe this silly idea that they all hide from you and don't make youtube videos, etc., because the Universe won't allow you to see them, because of your "beliefs". The people pushing this stuff obviously don't manifest it themselves - they're not violating physical laws or running 30 second miles - so they merely indulge in the thoughts, without actually putting them into practice. They are armchair philosopher types who get something psychologically from the un-implemented delusions of grandeur. That seems strange, but that's a lot of so-called "spirituality". |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 17, 2024 10:38:10 GMT -5
You mean I can't just sit at home and attract muscle gains while posting to online forums? I have to work the muscles and eat protein? That's not very spiritual. If you're spiritual enough you can get anything you want with your magical thinking. Don't be a loser who "works"; that's for the lower classes. To me that Hicks passage was similar to one of my old tricks: "look for flowers". Once you make that intent, you notice they are everywhere. I bet there's some in your presence right now because floral designs are everywhere. It's just a little saying that means notice the beauty in the world rather than fixate on the nasty stuff. These people who promote the power of the mind are fine, it's true, but it doesn't work with 'vibration' (whatever that is). It's just that glass and feathers are everywhere if you care to notice (though I reckon Hicks probably made up that story anyway). Try vibrating up a real-living Minotaur and see how it works.
True enough that you see what you're looking for. One of my friends that helped me learn how to drive commiserated "yeah, once you have a car, you start seeing 'your' car all over the place!". But then, sometimes, it's a matter of degree of probability. I could tell a story about a car + license plate + circumstance that are on the low side of probability, more along the lines of a synch, rather than a coincidence. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 17, 2024 11:29:24 GMT -5
No, I'm not familiar with Richard Bach. Oh, then you might find this interesting, because Esther/Abraham's story is at least a coincidence with it.  Illusions was published in 1977. Will come back to the rest of your post later. Thanks for taking the time to write. |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Feb 17, 2024 17:26:50 GMT -5
Given benefit of the doubt, those who biuld appreciable muscle without resistance exercise (+ nutrition) are so few that they don't even register statistically, so obviously these idea about beliefs are incongruent with observable reality. On the other hand, completely regardless of what anyone believes, adequate volumes of resistance training coupled with appropriate nutrition will stimulate muscle growth with a statistical significance of near enough 100%. When I state the obvious to support a claim that is self-evident I conclude I'm wasting my time on nonsense. Even if such people were rare, but existed, you also have to believe this silly idea that they all hide from you and don't make youtube videos, etc., because the Universe won't allow you to see them, because of your "beliefs". The people pushing this stuff obviously don't manifest it themselves - they're not violating physical laws or running 30 second miles - so they merely indulge in the thoughts, without actually putting them into practice. They are armchair philosopher types who get something psychologically from the un-implemented delusions of grandeur. That seems strange, but that's a lot of so-called "spirituality". I tend to go with what works regardless of what anyone believes, and if anyone can give me an example of someone who gained appreciable muscle mass without adapting to work... I'm not holding my breath. However individuals have their own genetic potential, like one of my brothers doesn't train but is freakishly strong, whereas I have a tall thin build and a below average response to exercise. However, now we're pushing 60 I have noticed age related muscle loss affecting him much more severely than it affects me. My other brother is a tradie so he's active all the time, hence although not built as a strong-man, he's not losing it with age... yet. In the end we will all lose it with age and everyone will die. That's just how life goes, and contrary beliefs are eventually proven wrong. Hence I recommend what works for everyone all the time and do not recommend what works for...wait, I haven't heard of a single example... but apparently that's irrelevant  .
|
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 17, 2024 17:52:31 GMT -5
Even if such people were rare, but existed, you also have to believe this silly idea that they all hide from you and don't make youtube videos, etc., because the Universe won't allow you to see them, because of your "beliefs". The people pushing this stuff obviously don't manifest it themselves - they're not violating physical laws or running 30 second miles - so they merely indulge in the thoughts, without actually putting them into practice. They are armchair philosopher types who get something psychologically from the un-implemented delusions of grandeur. That seems strange, but that's a lot of so-called "spirituality". I tend to go with what works regardless of what anyone believes, and if anyone can give me an example of someone who gained appreciable muscle mass without adapting to work... I'm not holding my breath. However individuals have their own genetic potential, like one of my brothers doesn't train but is freakishly strong, whereas I have a tall thin build and a below average response to exercise. However, now we're pushing 60 I have noticed age related muscle loss affecting him much more severely than it affects me. My other brother is a tradie so he's active all the time, hence although not built as a strong-man, he's not losing it with age... yet. In the end we will all lose it with age and everyone will die. That's just how life goes, and contrary beliefs are eventually proven wrong. Hence I recommend what works for everyone all the time and do not recommend what works for...wait, I haven't heard of a single example... but apparently that's irrelevant . It takes an extremely rare individual to be congruent in a belief that goes against the way that things overwhelmingly seem to be. I actually basically agree with Reefs, and I hold some strange and unusual beliefs, but I also acknowledge that I'm not fully congruent with them, and I honor that lack of congruence. I don't tend to do stupid sh/t because I acknowledge where I'm 'at' within my own mind. Also, just to note (which Reefs probably did)....let's say I hold a joyful vision of myself as super-healthy. The unfolding path might then have me lifting weights, doing cardio and changing my diet! In this sense, what you and Reefs are saying isn't mutually exclusive. Reefs is basically just saying it doesn't HAVE to be that way. Like those rare cases that people go against doctor's expectations of dying from a 'terminal' illnesses, by doing something unusual. |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Feb 17, 2024 19:01:11 GMT -5
I tend to go with what works regardless of what anyone believes, and if anyone can give me an example of someone who gained appreciable muscle mass without adapting to work... I'm not holding my breath. However individuals have their own genetic potential, like one of my brothers doesn't train but is freakishly strong, whereas I have a tall thin build and a below average response to exercise. However, now we're pushing 60 I have noticed age related muscle loss affecting him much more severely than it affects me. My other brother is a tradie so he's active all the time, hence although not built as a strong-man, he's not losing it with age... yet. In the end we will all lose it with age and everyone will die. That's just how life goes, and contrary beliefs are eventually proven wrong. Hence I recommend what works for everyone all the time and do not recommend what works for...wait, I haven't heard of a single example... but apparently that's irrelevant . It takes an extremely rare individual to be congruent in a belief that goes against the way that things overwhelmingly seem to be. I actually basically agree with Reefs, and I hold some strange and unusual beliefs, but I also acknowledge that I'm not fully congruent with them, and I honor that lack of congruence. I don't tend to do stupid sh/t because I acknowledge where I'm 'at' within my own mind. Also, just to note (which Reefs probably did)....let's say I hold a joyful vision of myself as super-healthy. The unfolding path might then have me lifting weights, doing cardio and changing my diet! In this sense, what you and Reefs are saying isn't mutually exclusive. Reefs is basically just saying it doesn't HAVE to be that way. Like those rare cases that people go against doctor's expectations of dying from a 'terminal' illnesses, by doing something unusual. Sure, I have no doubt about the power of belief, but there's also just facts, and when everyone believed the solar system was geocentric, it didn't make it so. The planets were going round the sun the whole time and everyone was wrong. I just say, if you want more muscle mass, if you eat in a certain way and do sufficient volumes of resistance training - that will work every time regardless of who doubts it. Belief will be important with the confident 'I can' or 'it's possible' attitude, but it's not actually necessary, so if there's a ton of doubt, that won't make any difference if you maintain the diet and exercise volume. Since it works for everyone, we say 'that's how it works'. It's not a 'mass belief'. We just looked and found out how it works, same as we looked at the planets and found out they all go round the sun. Not that this undermines the power of belief. It just says you can belief things and turn out to be wrong - and that happens all the time. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Feb 17, 2024 19:20:12 GMT -5
... The planets were going round the sun the whole time and everyone was wrong. ... We just looked and found out how it works, same as we looked at the planets and found out they all go round the sun. Not that this undermines the power of belief. It just says you can belief things and turn out to be wrong - and that happens all the time. FYI: Not really. Although it doesn't matter for this discussion.  EDIT: link |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 17, 2024 19:25:35 GMT -5
It takes an extremely rare individual to be congruent in a belief that goes against the way that things overwhelmingly seem to be. I actually basically agree with Reefs, and I hold some strange and unusual beliefs, but I also acknowledge that I'm not fully congruent with them, and I honor that lack of congruence. I don't tend to do stupid sh/t because I acknowledge where I'm 'at' within my own mind. Also, just to note (which Reefs probably did)....let's say I hold a joyful vision of myself as super-healthy. The unfolding path might then have me lifting weights, doing cardio and changing my diet! In this sense, what you and Reefs are saying isn't mutually exclusive. Reefs is basically just saying it doesn't HAVE to be that way. Like those rare cases that people go against doctor's expectations of dying from a 'terminal' illnesses, by doing something unusual. Sure, I have no doubt about the power of belief, but there's also just facts, and when everyone believed the solar system was geocentric, it didn't make it so. The planets were going round the sun the whole time and everyone was wrong. I just say, if you want more muscle mass, if you eat in a certain way and do sufficient volumes of resistance training - that will work every time regardless of who doubts it. Belief will be important with the confident 'I can' or 'it's possible' attitude, but it's not actually necessary, so if there's a ton of doubt, that won't make any difference if you maintain the diet and exercise volume. Since it works for everyone, we say 'that's how it works'. It's not a 'mass belief'. We just looked and found out that's how it works, same as we looked at the planets and found out they all go round the sun. Not that this undermines the power of belief. It just says you can belief things and turn out to be wrong - and that happens all the time. yeah, I basically agree. My view is that when we 'sign up' for human-earth experience, we sign up to particular rules of the game. These aren't absolute rules, they are relative rules and physical laws that apply to our collective experience. Much like in the old game 'Dungeons and Dragons'...there's a template, there's a guide/rule book, and then there's people playing the game from within those rules. We give ourselves limits within which to learn, expand, grow and play. And my path of least resistance tends to be to play within those rules, whilst gently expanding them over time, in line with my own broader interests and desires. And as part of my own learning process, I have gotten my fingers burned sometimes when I try to expand the rules too fast. I am older and wise now than I was...say...15 years ago....I've made friends with my inner limits. For example, if I have a tooth problem, as much as I'd like to click my fingers and repair it, I don't congruently believe I can. So I go to the dentist. So yeah, a rule of our human-earth game is that if you want to get fit, you engage with your mind and body in a particular way. I know Reefs enjoys swimming. I walk a fair bit. But I also recognize and honor the potential for making what may 'seem' impossible....possible. And I believe we are moving into a time in which we are becoming aware of how the quality of our choices, intentions, thoughts and feelings do relate to what is unfolding. |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Feb 17, 2024 19:31:25 GMT -5
... The planets were going round the sun the whole time and everyone was wrong. ... We just looked and found out how it works, same as we looked at the planets and found out they all go round the sun. Not that this undermines the power of belief. It just says you can belief things and turn out to be wrong - and that happens all the time. FYI: Not really. Although it doesn't matter for this discussion. EDIT: linkCentre of mass is a good example of something that exists, yet has no substance. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Feb 17, 2024 21:14:27 GMT -5
FYI: Not really. Although it doesn't matter for this discussion. ... EDIT: linkCentre of mass is a good example of something that exists, yet has no substance. Actually, there is no "hard" substance. Think about the atom: most of it is nothing. Then it's nucleus is made mostly of nothing, and so on each particle. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Feb 17, 2024 23:54:40 GMT -5
No, I'm not familiar with Richard Bach. Oh, then you might find this interesting, because Esther/Abraham's story is at least a coincidence with it. Illusions was published in 1977. Will come back to the rest of your post later. Thanks for taking the time to write. Interesting. The plot thickens... |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Feb 18, 2024 0:20:01 GMT -5
I tend to go with what works regardless of what anyone believes, and if anyone can give me an example of someone who gained appreciable muscle mass without adapting to work... I'm not holding my breath. However individuals have their own genetic potential, like one of my brothers doesn't train but is freakishly strong, whereas I have a tall thin build and a below average response to exercise. However, now we're pushing 60 I have noticed age related muscle loss affecting him much more severely than it affects me. My other brother is a tradie so he's active all the time, hence although not built as a strong-man, he's not losing it with age... yet. In the end we will all lose it with age and everyone will die. That's just how life goes, and contrary beliefs are eventually proven wrong. Hence I recommend what works for everyone all the time and do not recommend what works for...wait, I haven't heard of a single example... but apparently that's irrelevant . It takes an extremely rare individual to be congruent in a belief that goes against the way that things overwhelmingly seem to be. I actually basically agree with Reefs, and I hold some strange and unusual beliefs, but I also acknowledge that I'm not fully congruent with them, and I honor that lack of congruence. I don't tend to do stupid sh/t because I acknowledge where I'm 'at' within my own mind. Also, just to note (which Reefs probably did)....let's say I hold a joyful vision of myself as super-healthy. The unfolding path might then have me lifting weights, doing cardio and changing my diet! In this sense, what you and Reefs are saying isn't mutually exclusive. Reefs is basically just saying it doesn't HAVE to be that way. Like those rare cases that people go against doctor's expectations of dying from a 'terminal' illnesses, by doing something unusual. Correct. Not sure why that is so difficult to understand. This is spirituality 101 after all, and absolute beginner level. And those instances of healing you mention are also well documented, even by doctors (see Moorjani). I'm reading an interesting book right now, The Body Electric, it's basically about how healing works, and specifically about how salamanders regrow limbs. There was one case where a salamander fully regrew one limb several times in just three months, I think. That sounds fantastical at first, but once you understand the forces at work and how they work, nothing fantastical about it, especially if you use scientific terms instead of spiritual terms, e.g. replace 'life force' by 'voltage'. So as with Patanjali, this is not make-belief, it can actually be explained scientifically. Unfortunately, as with the previous karma discussion, it doesn't seem Lolly actually understands the argument, not to mention the constant logical errors in his argumentation. It's potentially an interesting discussion, but under such circumstances a total waste of time, I'm afraid. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Feb 18, 2024 1:37:32 GMT -5
Effects of Mental Imagery on Muscular Strength in Healthy and Patient Participants: A Systematic ReviewlinkJ Sports Sci Med. 2016 Sep; 15(3): 434–450. Published online 2016 Aug 5. From the abstract: - ... Overall, the results reveal that the combination of mental imagery and physical practice is more efficient than, or at least comparable to, physical execution with respect to strength performance. Imagery prevention intervention was also effective in reducing of strength loss after short-term muscle immobilization and ACL. The present review also indicates advantageous effects of internal imagery (range from 2.6 to 136.3%) for strength performance compared with external imagery (range from 4.8 to 23.2%). Typically, mental imagery with muscular activity was higher in active than passive muscles, and imagining “lifting a heavy object” resulted in more EMG activity compared with imagining “lifting a lighter object”. Thus, in samples of students, novices, or youth male and female athletes, internal mental imagery has a greater effect on muscle strength than external mental imagery does. Imagery ability, motivation, and self-efficacy have been shown to be the variables mediating the effect of mental imagery on strength performance. ...
|
|
Illusions was published in 1977.
.