Welcome to the Free Talk Live bulletin board system!
This board is closed to new users and new posts.  Thank you to all our great mods and users over the years.  Details here.
185859 Posts in 9829 Topics by 1371 Members
Latest Member: cjt26
Home Help
+  The Free Talk Live BBS
|-+  Free Talk Live
| |-+  The Show
| | |-+  Law of Attraction
Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 32   Go Down

Author Topic: Law of Attraction  (Read 90546 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Dylboz

  • What a deal! A few bucks a month makes me an
  • FTL AMPlifier Silver
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2283
  • Only Anarcho-Capitalism is consistent with the NAP
    • View Profile
Re: Law of Attraction
« Reply #315 on: February 09, 2009, 01:36:10 PM »

So, please stop claiming that a pantheistic view is in any way a rejection of right and wrong.

But you just did! You have embraced moral relativism! To you, there is no right or wrong outside your own subjective internal experience, so what is right for Ian is not right for the cops, so you have no basis to criticize when they throw Barskey in jail! They view his open container and firearm as wrong, so they choose to do right by arresting him before he hurts anyone. Besides, he apparently got what he wanted anyway, an opportunity to get pinched and wind up in the slammer.

Huh?  Aren't your morals based on your logic and experience of what is right and wrong, or did you just accept what someone else told you is moral?

That's a total non-sequitur, Ian. Kind of tricky, but OK. My morals were indeed arrived at with logic, which I had to learn. I didn't just feel empowerment or whatever and go with it, I had to reason from first principles. I had to learn those, too. I didn't just take them whole and unexamined from someone else, though (as you seem to have in the form of LoA from Sam). I read and questioned and discovered through observation and experience what happened in the world when people acted in certain ways or when they refrained from acting certain ways. By checking my conclusions and those of others against my experience and knowledge of history, I came to realize that some of these things were actually objective, and existed externally to me. They were not subjective, in the sense that you believe what is true for you may not be true for others. I rejected solipsism, because I could empirically verify the existence of things and consciousness outside of my own. Resisting reality and choosing fantasy over it always, invariably, like a law of nature, leads to ruin and disaster, if not for yourself, then for someone who comes up against the limiting facts of reality. Utopian fantasies, like "the universe delivers me opportunities to get what I want if I focus on them," are as dangerous as "the dictatorship of the proletariat will deliver prosperity and total freedom to all." The only way to deal with the world is as it really is, not as you want it to be, regardless of how disempowering that might feel sometimes.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2009, 01:40:50 PM by Dylboz »
Logged
Religion is metaphysical statism. I will be ruled by no man on earth, nor by any god in heaven.

Please check out my blog!
Dylboznia

FTL_Ian

  • Professional Iconoclast
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10446
    • View Profile
    • Free Keene
Re: Law of Attraction
« Reply #316 on: February 09, 2009, 01:42:37 PM »

But you said that we're god, and that's the definition you gave for god.  So you mean that we're part of all that is, has been, and ever shall be, and all of that is god? 

Second question-- everybody can agree that existence.....exists.  But what is the point of calling it "god"?  What's wrong with "existence"?

If you want to call it god or existence, you may.  They are just one way of describing all-that-is.

Quote
Everybody can agree that in the universe we can find opportunities.  What is the benefit of saying that the universe "sets up" opportunities?  In other words, what is the benefit of anthropomorphizing the universe? 

Does defining how gravity works anthropomorphize the universe too? 
Logged
Please support the show by joining the AMP program at http//amp.freetalklive.com

I blog at http://freekeene.com

The ghost of a ghost of a ghost

  • Owned by Brasky. Deal with it.
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1026
    • View Profile
Re: Law of Attraction
« Reply #317 on: February 09, 2009, 01:48:48 PM »

Ian maybe you should adjust the caption under your name to read:

Part time Iconoclast
Professional Iconolater
Logged

John Shaw

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17244
    • View Profile
    • Think Twice Productions
Re: Law of Attraction
« Reply #318 on: February 09, 2009, 01:48:58 PM »

Alright, everyone stop picking on Ian.

He doesn't get it.

Fine.

*Backing away slowly from La La Land*
Logged
"btw its not a claim. Its documented fact."

Rillion

  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6804
    • View Profile
Re: Law of Attraction
« Reply #319 on: February 09, 2009, 01:49:24 PM »

But you said that we're god, and that's the definition you gave for god.  So you mean that we're part of all that is, has been, and ever shall be, and all of that is god? 

Second question-- everybody can agree that existence.....exists.  But what is the point of calling it "god"?  What's wrong with "existence"?

If you want to call it god or existence, you may.  They are just one way of describing all-that-is.

That doesn't answer my question.  The terms "god" and "existence" obviously don't mean the same thing for most people.  Gods, typically speaking, are things that are worshiped.  They have thoughts, feelings, goals, and power, and they exert that power in accordance with those.  Existence, on the other hand, is simply the sum total of everything.  So again-- why call existence "god"?

Quote
Everybody can agree that in the universe we can find opportunities.  What is the benefit of saying that the universe "sets up" opportunities?  In other words, what is the benefit of anthropomorphizing the universe? 
Quote
Does defining how gravity works anthropomorphize the universe too? 

No, because it doesn't attribute intention to the universe.  Saying that the universe "sets things up" does.  Saying that the universe "wants" things does.  If you mean to use these terms metaphorically, it sure doesn't come off that way. 
Logged

FTL_Ian

  • Professional Iconoclast
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10446
    • View Profile
    • Free Keene
Re: Law of Attraction
« Reply #320 on: February 09, 2009, 01:53:21 PM »

That's a total non-sequitur, Ian. Kind of tricky, but OK. My morals were indeed arrived at with logic, which I had to learn. I didn't just feel empowerment or whatever and go with it, I had to reason from first principles. I had to learn those, too. I didn't just take them whole and unexamined from someone else, though (as you seem to have in the form of LoA from Sam). I read and questioned and discovered through observation and experience what happened in the world when people acted in certain ways or when they refrained from acting certain ways. By checking my conclusions and those of others against my experience and knowledge of history, I came to realize that some of these things were actually objective, and existed externally to me. They were not subjective, in the sense that you believe what is true for you may not be true for others. I rejected solipsism, because I could empirically verify the existence of things and consciousness outside of my own. Resisting reality and choosing fantasy over it always, invariably, like a law of nature, leads to ruin and disaster, if not for yourself, then for someone who comes up against the limiting facts of reality. Utopian fantasies, like "the universe delivers me opportunities to get what I want if I focus on them," are as dangerous as "the dictatorship of the proletariat will deliver prosperity and total freedom to all." The only way to deal with the world is as it really is, not as you want it to be, regardless of how disempowering that might feel sometimes.

The fantasy of a voluntary society is "dangerous"?   Not sure how you drew that conclusion.

I will continue to be the change I wish to see in the world, and I will continue to see it, because thoughts can become reality.  I've seen it happen.
Logged
Please support the show by joining the AMP program at http//amp.freetalklive.com

I blog at http://freekeene.com

Dylboz

  • What a deal! A few bucks a month makes me an
  • FTL AMPlifier Silver
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2283
  • Only Anarcho-Capitalism is consistent with the NAP
    • View Profile
Re: Law of Attraction
« Reply #321 on: February 09, 2009, 01:55:27 PM »

There is a big difference between saying "the ball is attracted to the earth when I release it, by the action of gravitational forces that are constant throughout the universe, " and "the ball wants to hit the ground, so the universe responds to it's desire by creating the opportunity for it to fall as it does."
Logged
Religion is metaphysical statism. I will be ruled by no man on earth, nor by any god in heaven.

Please check out my blog!
Dylboznia

FTL_Ian

  • Professional Iconoclast
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10446
    • View Profile
    • Free Keene
Re: Law of Attraction
« Reply #322 on: February 09, 2009, 01:59:30 PM »

That doesn't answer my question.  The terms "god" and "existence" obviously don't mean the same thing for most people.  Gods, typically speaking, are things that are worshiped.  They have thoughts, feelings, goals, and power, and they exert that power in accordance with those.  Existence, on the other hand, is simply the sum total of everything.  So again-- why call existence "god"?

The universe as god doesn't need worship, so I agree that colloquially, god isn't the best term.  It's god in the sense that it is that from which all springs forth.

Quote
No, because it doesn't attribute intention to the universe.  Saying that the universe "sets things up" does.  Saying that the universe "wants" things does.  If you mean to use these terms metaphorically, it sure doesn't come off that way. 

Yeah, I see your confusion.  It is your intention that the universe is responding to.  You are the universe experiencing itself.
Logged
Please support the show by joining the AMP program at http//amp.freetalklive.com

I blog at http://freekeene.com

FTL_Ian

  • Professional Iconoclast
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10446
    • View Profile
    • Free Keene
Re: Law of Attraction
« Reply #323 on: February 09, 2009, 02:00:55 PM »

There is a big difference between saying "the ball is attracted to the earth when I release it, by the action of gravitational forces that are constant throughout the universe, " and "the ball wants to hit the ground, so the universe responds to it's desire by creating the opportunity for it to fall as it does."

Except that I wasn't claiming one was related to the other.  Only that LoA is not suggesting the universe is anthropomorphic. 
Logged
Please support the show by joining the AMP program at http//amp.freetalklive.com

I blog at http://freekeene.com

Rillion

  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6804
    • View Profile
Re: Law of Attraction
« Reply #324 on: February 09, 2009, 02:07:28 PM »

It is your intention that the universe is responding to.  

And how does it do that? 

Quote
You are the universe experiencing itself.

I am part  of the universe, experiencing other parts of the universe.  Not quite the same thing.  To say that I am the universe experiencing itself implies either that there is only one consciousness and it is me, or that there are many consciousnesses and I have some kind of multiple personality disorder. 

Only that LoA is not suggesting the universe is anthropomorphic. 

It is if it says that the universe grants wishes. 

Logged

Dylboz

  • What a deal! A few bucks a month makes me an
  • FTL AMPlifier Silver
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2283
  • Only Anarcho-Capitalism is consistent with the NAP
    • View Profile
Re: Law of Attraction
« Reply #325 on: February 09, 2009, 02:11:19 PM »



The fantasy of a voluntary society is "dangerous"?   Not sure how you drew that conclusion.

I will continue to be the change I wish to see in the world, and I will continue to see it, because thoughts can become reality.  I've seen it happen.

Wow, that's every bit as (seemingly) dishonest a reply to what I wrote as I have ever gotten from Gene, the Christian Anarchist, but I'll chalk it up to misunderstanding.

No, Ian. I don't believe the possibility for and desire to create a voluntary society is "dangerous." I want that kind of society myself. But imagining that anything other than interacting with the world and other people as they actually, really are, will fail to achieve it. Pretending that the universe, whatever that means to you, will deliver that society to you as a result of your willing it to be, by focusing your desire for it in you mind, will lead to perverse incentives, a misallocation of resources and effort, and ultimately, disappointment. Positive thinking is fine, but it will not actually change the universe or bring you opportunities for action. Wishing for bikes doesn't bring them to you door.

Reality is what it is, and sometimes it does not deliver you the opportunity you want, when you want or even need it. No amount of positive thinking or visualization will change that fact. I could not have LoAed my congenital heart defects away, they required multiple surgeries and a lot of painful recovery. I still have to take my blood pressure meds daily, and if I traded them in for The Secret's style of positive thinking, I'd likely die young or need another surgery very soon. If I spent my money on lottery tickets and my time visualizing a jackpot win, that would be personally disastrous, and apparently, it has been done in the name of LoA. Intention and desire alone do not affect the universe, only action does. That's reality. It doesn't work the way you keep saying it does. Believing that it does may lead to a personal disaster for you, which I think would be sad. That's what I meant.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2009, 02:41:09 PM by Dylboz »
Logged
Religion is metaphysical statism. I will be ruled by no man on earth, nor by any god in heaven.

Please check out my blog!
Dylboznia

FTL_Ian

  • Professional Iconoclast
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10446
    • View Profile
    • Free Keene
Re: Law of Attraction
« Reply #326 on: February 09, 2009, 02:29:06 PM »

Okay Dylboz - thanks for your thoughts.  Never said you'd get a free bike or that it'd help you win the lotto.  Again, more evidence you don't get it.


Logged
Please support the show by joining the AMP program at http//amp.freetalklive.com

I blog at http://freekeene.com

FTL_Ian

  • Professional Iconoclast
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10446
    • View Profile
    • Free Keene
Re: Law of Attraction
« Reply #327 on: February 09, 2009, 02:32:52 PM »

It is your intention that the universe is responding to.  

And how does it do that? 

Fuck if I know or care.

Quote
I am part  of the universe, experiencing other parts of the universe.  Not quite the same thing.  To say that I am the universe experiencing itself implies either that there is only one consciousness and it is me, or that there are many consciousnesses and I have some kind of multiple personality disorder. 

True, it'd be more accurate to say you and everyone else are the universe experiencing itself.

Quote
Only that LoA is not suggesting the universe is anthropomorphic. 

It is if it says that the universe grants wishes. 

That's not what it says.
Logged
Please support the show by joining the AMP program at http//amp.freetalklive.com

I blog at http://freekeene.com

weinerdogg

  • Guest
Re: Law of Attraction
« Reply #328 on: February 09, 2009, 02:34:47 PM »

I really like the LOA stuff although its nothing new to me as I have practiced positive thinking and affirmation since high schoo. days

I dislike the whole "LOA cult" thing that I see happening and it appears to be used mostly from the folks who dilsike LOA or anything that is associated with it.

LOA is nothing more than positive thinking...ad IMO no need to get so religous about it. .nor should it be attacked as if it were whodoo-voodoo.
Logged

Dylboz

  • What a deal! A few bucks a month makes me an
  • FTL AMPlifier Silver
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2283
  • Only Anarcho-Capitalism is consistent with the NAP
    • View Profile
Re: Law of Attraction
« Reply #329 on: February 09, 2009, 02:38:14 PM »

Okay Dylboz - thanks for your thoughts.  Never said you'd get a free bike or that it'd help you win the lotto.  Again, more evidence you don't get it.




Well, you didn't, but the Secret does. I've seen it. At least the bike part. But I don't think there's anything to "get." It's a lot of mumbo jumbo mantras and repeated slogans.
Logged
Religion is metaphysical statism. I will be ruled by no man on earth, nor by any god in heaven.

Please check out my blog!
Dylboznia
Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 32   Go Up
+  The Free Talk Live BBS
|-+  Free Talk Live
| |-+  The Show
| | |-+  Law of Attraction

// ]]>

Page created in 0.024 seconds with 32 queries.