Law of Attraction - Explain this Discrepancy

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Kris Stroz on December 4, 2008 at 11:55pm

This is a very good subject. I am glad you brought it up into a new thread, so we can discuss this without the other subject matter "taking away from" this discussion.

I agree. All the protesting brought some good changes, so what they said in the book is not correct. However, I tend to focus more on being rich rather than not being poor or keeping myself above the water.

What I don't understand is, today there are things that people don't like, but they do nothing about it. There seem to be fewer rallies and when they have them, there is not a lot of people there. There was a rally scheduled in my city. It was planned by the governers to put cameras in all the public parks. People protested and passed out flyers. For the actual rally, there was fewer than 50 people there. But we protested anyway and carried "Big Brother" signs. So I hear a lot of people complain and I say to them, "what are you doing about it?" They look at me. I say to them "you must do something if you want some change".

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Divine Muse on December 5, 2008 at 12:18am

Oh! Thank you so much for replying.

When I read your last line, in my mind, I said, "Exactly!"

I've noticed that people have become increasingly apathetic too and you know I think that's just as bad as say, believing the world is going to end, because of the economic crisis. Those are just two extremes. I remember back in San Antonio, when I use to live there, getting people to protest against the war was so difficult.

And there were a lot of people back then, that were against it, though they did nothing about it. (I realize part of it was because SA is a military town, but still, it was shocking to see.)

Kris, I think we all try to think rich, instead of keeping ourselves from drowning. It's a much happier thing to focus on. =D

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Manyfeather on December 5, 2008 at 11:03am

I have a bit different take on the 60's. There was protest, a bit NO, but underneath it all was the YES energy of peace, love and non resistance.
The civil rights had a lot of the non resistance energy going on too.
It was much deeper than just carrying signs and marching to Montgomery. It was a proclamation of peace in war time, a proclamation of equality during the civil rights era.

It's about contrast. Seeing what you don't want gives opportunity to define what you do want. Whichever energy you identify with the most passionate is what you get.

The loa always works.. we just don't always see what's going on energy wise in every situation.
Right now we are talking about recession. The more people talk about, worry about and stress over it the more it hangs on. What is the opposite of recession? Prosperity.. so think prosperity, feel prosperity, act abundance. It's the energy then the actions.

Smiles,
Donna

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Brian on December 5, 2008 at 12:19pm

I wouldn't quite agree with your argument. You seem to believe that the country changed BECAUSE OF "...people protesting and bringing attention to the very same negative things..."

But the Law of Attraction suggests that the country changed IN SPITE OF these very things. Many of the protests were not negative, and I think there's a strong argument to make saying that the negatively charged protests harmed the peace movement efforts rather than helping them.

There was so much love, good will, "hip vibe," whatever you want to call it in the 60s, that ultimately this is what changed America, overcoming the crazy, paranoid, anti-communist dictatorship mentality that had gripped the country since Kennedy was killed (or before?). But this is just my opinion.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Divine Muse on December 5, 2008 at 1:53pm

Hi Brian & Donna!

(I love a good debate!)

You know from a historical argumentative perspective, some might argue that there were a lot of non-violent peace protests. I can't argue against factual historical evidence. However, I think it's unfair to assume that simply the positive brought about the major cultural changes in the 60s. Whether it was the Black Panthers, or the several protesters that were harmed-especially African Americans, these negative acts brought attention to the greater picture. I think to say that the 60s was an entire movement built upon peace and non resistance, in some ways is devaluing the sacrifices made amongst many people. Several people died, people were harmed brutally, and because of the attention to the negative situation, people became aware and the change that was needed was brought about.

I don't mean this to be specifically a discourse on race. (Although, that's another great topic, for another debate!) There's other incidents in history, where major positive changes were brought about after negative civil uprising. Think of Marie Antoinette and the French Revolution, the American civil war, or events such as Mexico's 5th of May that eventually led to the overthrow of Maximilian the 1st.

These weren't all based upon the focus of positive thought. Many civil uprisings occurred, because of the focus on the negative and though there could have been positive and negative actions associated with these uprisings, the end result still brought about positive change.

I suppose I should be clear and state that my hypothesis is that the LOA does not apply perfectly to major cultural movements that are at play. So incidents such as the economic crisis, wouldn't necessarily count, because that's simply a thought, a temporary action and situation. However, when you have real pivotal changes that's when the LOA does not seem to work as fluidly.

Even recently, I remember how the 90s there was a major shift towards the negative when rappers and riots brought attention to the unfair police harassment towards African Americans. I don't think some of the progress would have been made, had someone not thrown that first stone. It was a major cultural shift, causing others to see some of the disadvantages that even at that point in time African Americans faced.

I dunno, it just seems to me, as a history lover, that so many of the most significant changes across the world were brought about by both positive and negative actions & thoughts. And that to me doesn't seem to mesh with the whole LOA thing.

Anyways, I do appreciate and respect your opinions. I just wondered who else saw this odd dichotomy of sorts.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Brian on December 5, 2008 at 5:28pm

You find what you look for. If you look for negative events having a positive impact on history, you will certainly find it. I think it would be difficult to "prove" as this whole concept seems to me to be a matter of opinion, or perception. What is "negative" and what is "positive" anyway? The Law of Attraction doesn't know and doesn't care. All it knows is that what you think about is what you get.

You can look for negatives in history, and find all sorts of "examples" where LoA doesn't work. You get what you look for.

Or you can choose to see how LoA does work, and use it to further inspire yourself to fulfill your vision of the life you want.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Divine Muse on December 5, 2008 at 9:56pm

True, perspective does play a role, but I wanted to look at the larger picture in question, which includes negative acts.

As far as what negative and positive, well, one could argue it's based on intent or the action itself. But even that's getting a bit too philosophical for this debate. It reminds me of Kant, when I took philosophy in college. I hated Kant, LOL! =D

You do allude to a bigger picture, which is that there is truly no way of proving if it was the negative or positive actions alone, during such monumental moments, that affected history. We can't rewind time. At least, for now. (And when you said, "examples" the historian in me cried! But then again, historians love arguing with each other, as history is based on perspective and interpretation.)

But, like many of the lovely people here, I still think that the LOA has allowed me to live my life through the lens I see fit. And I think that's the best part of the LOA as it gives individuals control over their lives once again! =)

I just questioned the law on a larger world scale. We'll have to agree to disagree. =D

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by the7killers on December 6, 2008 at 1:40am

The Secret isn't something that you should take as a "complete" guide to LOA. Remember, it was a meant for a commercial audience, so they left out some important things to keep it "consumer friendly". That's why you should look at other LOA material. It doesn't matter what they SAID in those movements, so much as it does what they were VIBRATING, they all vibrated the solution to their problems.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Divine Muse on December 6, 2008 at 1:40pm

I wasn't focusing on what they said, rather their actions- negative actions! =D

And yes, even if The Secret was meant for mass consumption it still didn't pull away from the core of my argument. Or rather the most curious aspect of all! (In my mind, at least.) Even in science there's always an exception to a rule, so that's why I brought this up. If I recall correctly even some of the elements in the periodic table were not confined to specific "laws" or "rules," but they still are elements. (If you're wondering what I'm talking about, it's those elements to the far right of the periodic table. They had a specific name, but I can't recall it right now.)

Like I find it odd that you focus on vibrations where as others focus on thoughts and inspired action, and I'm specifically thinking of people here who are much more familiar with the Law of Attraction and the various other universal laws at play.

I mean, you have to admit it's quite interesting. =D

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by the7killers on December 6, 2008 at 2:03pm

I focus on vibration because it's what really matters; it's the language the universe speaks. People who "are much more familiar with the Law of Attraction and the various other universal laws at play" speak of vibration in the same manner I do. You think a thought and vibrate according to the meaning that the thought has to you. You think, you interpret your own thought, you vibrate, the universe responds. They said in the Secret(the book, I don't think they say it in the movie) that thought causes vibration. The universe gives you "what you're feeling about, not so much what you're thinking about"(that's from the movie). They said several times in the movie and book you get what you're feeling about. Virtually every Law of Attraction teacher, involved with the Secret or not, says you have to feel it in order to get it. Feeling is vibration. Two people could both say "I want to get out of debt", but the one that sees himself freely spending and making money will still get out of debt because he vibrated, or felt, having money. Also, there's really no need to talk about the other laws because the Law of Attraction, sometimes referred to as "the Law" is the most powerful law in the universe and basically overrides other laws; most teachers say that as well.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Samadhiatman500 on December 6, 2008 at 4:09am

Wow browsing and what do I come accross but YOUR post. LOL Well interestingly enough my take on this Divine would be that the attention was put on Peace, On Equal Rights For All and Justice For All. Like the great Civil Rights Leader Dr. Martin Luther King said himself, "I shall see a day when my children can go to school with other children and not be afraid." It may not be exact but loosely stated. He and other magical geniuses knew to focus on what it was they did want. There was resistance by the powers that be. In fact, Jack Canfield and Michael Beckwith, talk about this in the Secret movie. The leading mass consciousness was calling for change but those in power, such as, slaveowners of the past... the Nazis, certain powerful affluent groups did not want change because it took away their power.

Such as the Brown vs. Board of Education. The hateful demonstators spewing hatred did not want their power taken so we saw the riots, and the physical fighting, etc.. It was more reactionary behaviior to change but the prevailing and dominant thought process vibration won in the end because it was stronger. There will always be cautionary reactionary negative behaviors, permeated on a lower-thought vibration, but the dominant mass consciousness wins out.

This is exactly how Mr. Barak Obama won the presidency by a landslide. Although all the dominant in-office others wanted us to think there was corruption, lying and conspiracy in fact it brought more attention to Barak and it is why the electoral college votes practically broke the voting machines. It had already been decided, Barak was in.

This is my loose take on it. I hope this is helpful to you. High five my universal-vibrationatory sister-girl and friend.
Marie

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Divine Muse on December 6, 2008 at 1:46pm

Hee!

You know a lot of what you said resonated and spoke to the little historian in me. I think I liked this line best, "There will always be cautionary reactionary negative behaviors, permeated on a lower-thought vibration, but the dominant mass consciousness wins out." You should be on a debate team.

I liked how you brought up the recent election. It makes sense. You know what's funny, I almost brought up the supreme court case you mentioned in an earlier post.

It was helpful, thank you chicky!

Lots of Love!

Divine Muse

▶ Reply to This

• 1
• 2