[quote]Petedacook wrote:
I have to agree with Dweez on this, although he did come across a bit harsh. But I think he was harsh because he is a smart guy and does not need this type of “thought mechanism” to make change.
What needs to be understood with this film/idea is there are 2 possibilities:
- You think it and your thoughts will the universe to make it happen = A higher power is at work and makes it happen.
or
- You think it, and your belief in this higher power causes you to act in a way that makes it happen = You made happen through your actions, not any higher power. The belief in the higher power is merely a tool that causes you to think, and take action.
Item #1 cannot be scientifically proven.
Item #2 can be scientifically proven.
The important thing is that the belief in item #1 causes many people to act/succeed in a way they other wise would not. some people believe they will fail, so don’t try, and certainly dont try hard, but if they believe there is a higher power, then they apply themselves.
Some people, like Dweez, realizes this (or seems to from what I’ve read here) and knows he does not need a faulty belief to, shall we say, “get things done.”
This type of thought tool is much like chanting, meditating, and also reminds me of the Zen Buddhist (I think I spelled/named it right), as well as Wiccan religions. Another example is Thinking Rich or whatever that book was some of you named.
There really is nothing wrong with these thought provokers. Some people can benefit from them, some don’t need them for the same thought power. Some people are just too stupid to even understand how to believe it will happen and “accept it when it comes,” so will get nothing from the movie.
To illustrate my point, I quote HardcoreHorn:
HardcoreHorn wrote:
One day a person decides he wants to stop being so skinny and build a muscular frame. By focusing intently on this goal, and believing that he will succeed, he will attract through universal forces certain “things” to succeed. These “things” may be the motivation to start going to the gym, a sudden idea to check the internet for information on building muscle, which will lead him here, or he may even attract certain people who he will interact with and possibly have oppurtunities open up to him through his interactions with this person."
In this example, everything the person achieved was due to his actions:" motivation to start going to the gym." Albeit, his actions were driven by his belief there was a higher power at work; nonetheless, they were his actions which led to the success. It is irrelevant that he “worked harder” because he believed there was higher power at work. What is relevant is that HE worked harder.
He didn’t learn through osmosis, he didn’t wake up with muscle. He did it himself and he could have done it without that belief in higher power if he just realized he needed to try hard, apply himself in every way he can, constantly contemplate how he can achieve this goal, think, and act.
Simply believing it will happen will not do it for you. It is simply not scientifically possible. Like the movie said, you have to be willing to “accept it when it comes.” This means it is you doing it, not a higher power.
Second example to further illustrate my point (skip it if you get the idea):
If I want to win the lottery, and I believe I will win the lottery because of this higher power, but I do not play the lottery …Well, I will most likely never win the lottery. Unless I find a winning ticket, and what are the odds in that?
However, if I believe I will win the lottery and I “accept it when it comes,” well, then in theory I will go out of my way to play the lottery, download lottery analysis programs, get in on lottery pools, read books on winning the lottery, search the internet for ideas on how to win, and maybe even mug people buying lottery tickets. Regardless of whether or not I ever win, I just greatly increased my chances of winning by thinking, applying my thought, and acting on it.
Again, no mystical powers at work, just me thinking and acting which improves my odds, and that my friends is scientifically proveable.
In closing, with all the books being mentioned, I thought I would throw one out there that is a little different from those already discussed/mentioned. It examines “Zen state of mind” vs. the “Scientific Method”. The name is “Zen and The Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.” Anyone famaliar with that one?
[/quote]
Best post on the entire thread.
Period.
This is what I should have prefaced my whole post with.
I enjoyed Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, although it was a bit of a dry read. Phaedrus has some very interesting ideas on classical vs romantic thinking.
Thanks for contributing, man.
-Nate