Laws Of Attraction
Posted by Mitch Mitchell on Sep 23, 2009
I've alluded to the topic of the Laws of Attraction many times over the years, but I've never specifically written about it. It's about time I did, and this is that post.
The laws of attraction are based on the concept that says you will bring into your life what you attract. That's the very simplistic view of it. The principle actually came about early in the 20th century as part of something known as the New Thought Movement, which stated that "every completed manifestation, of whatever kind and on whatever scale" as "an unquenchable energy of attraction" that causes objects to "steadily increase in power and definiteness of purpose, until the process of growth is completed and the matured form stands out as an accomplished fact".
Basically, as they say in the movie The Secret, thoughts become things. But there's also a portion of it that's supposedly based on quantum physics. The principle here states that everything in the universe is energy, and that there's as much positive energy as negative energy. The universe will bring to you what you really believe and feel, which means you need to control your thoughts and actions fully. It's a dicey proposition because you can wish for a lot of money and think 'okay, I want a lot of money, why isn't it coming', but if the overriding emotion is 'I have a lot of debt and I need money', then debt is the overriding emotion that you can't control, more of a fear factor, and thus money won't come because your fear factor is stronger at that moment in time.
Confused yet? Well, it can seem somewhat confusing, to the point that it's garnered a lot of controversy because people don't fully understand the process or how the laws of attraction are supposed to work. Some people believe all they have to do is think about something and it'll come their way. The movie gave them that belief, I have to admit, but if people were listening to what the speakers said instead of just watching what was going on, the rest of it was that you have to provide actions that show that's what you want in order to have things come your way. In essence, it's not just a belief; you actually have to do some work.
The thing about the laws of attraction is that it can work for you if you're in the right mindset. For me, the times when things have gone really well have been when I've been able to shed some of the mental restrictions I put on myself. It's not easy to do, and even now, though I'm pushing myself forward, I know there are things I'm still holding back on because things aren't flowing as smoothly as they need to. I have concerns, and those concerns slow me down. I've had concerns in the past also, but when I've been able to find a way to channel my mind in more positive ways, I accomplish great things.
As metaphysical as all of this sounds, in reality it's just plain ol' common sense. For instance, if you want to have a good life, you learn how to do things that will bring you that better life. You stop hanging around people who bring you down. You take charge of your life and do what you want to do, for the right reasons. If you need to learn something extra to progress and you really want to progress, you'll learn that thing. If you want to lose weight you'll acquiesce, eat less and work out more.
What the laws of attraction say is that all you need is a mindset shift, and positive things will come your way. That's true, but the work aspect is the part people miss. It also takes time; there are no immediate miracles that will occur once you're able to accept this idea of the laws of attraction. But you will feel better, and when you feel better, you'll find yourself doing some very positive things with your life.
And that's what the laws of attraction are all about. Now I have a true post to link to from this point on; whew!
Good morning, Mitch.
I think you’re right when you say the Law of Attraction is basically common sense.
One of the examples they show in the movie, The Secret, is someone spiraling out of control when a few things go wrong as they’re getting up and ready for their day.
By concentrating on what’s going wrong, it put them into the mindset to attract more things that they didn’t want.
Now, I don’t think that’s metaphysical at all and doesn’t require any vague references to quantum physics. It’s just a matter of concentrating on what they don’t want, letting their emotions get the better of them, and then making more mistakes because of their harried mood.
At least, that’s my take on it.
As far as using the Law of Attraction to get what we want, I think it’s a little more confusing.
This whole movement started becoming popular when radio was first being commercially introduced and people keep using the metaphors of receivers and transmitters.
When quantum physics came along and showed that (on a very micro level) Newtonian physics didn’t apply to things they were observing, some people jumped on this to explain things like the Law of Attraction.
However, quantum physics applies to interactions on the subatomic level, not on the level we observe in our normal lives.
I’m not going to go into a long discussion of quantum physics, but the basic idea that we can look at life as matter interacting on the normal scale, but as fields of energy and probabilities of results on the very micro level has been unnecessarily confusing for a lot of people.
So, while I don’t like or use the metaphor of a transceiver and don’t think quantum physics applies to living our lives in a macro world, I do think the concept that we are composed of energy and constantly interact in a single huge field of energy is an important concept and probably applies to this.
Even if it is confusing and can be the cause of great headaches. π
If we are all physically separated bodies of matter, then it would require some form of transmitter to interact with others.
If we are all part of a single field of energy, then any changes in our energy will affect the field, and vice versa.
Now, I know it sounds like I’m quibbling on this, but I’ve had many discussions with people who have tried to snow me with their (mis)understanding of physics.
I am not saying that you’re doing this.
So, I’m a bit sensitive to that aspect of it.
However, I know for a fact that when I’m focused both mentally and in the actions I’m taking on achieving something I really want, it happens much easier and faster than it does if I’m just plugging away.
On a metaphysical level, I’ve experienced a few times when the proper mental attitude actually produced some surprisingly good results with much less work than I would have expected.
I’ve also experienced times then the wrong mental attitude slowed me down, and, as you know, I’m working through one of those right now.
Does the Law of Attraction work?
Some people will ask, as a response, does the Law of Gravity work?
I believe that this is a nonsequitor, but I think there is some validity to the attitude behind the response.
Just because we don’t understand how something works, it doesn’t mean that we can’t learn how to make it work for us, or that we are immune to its effects.
I don’t know anyone who has gotten rich and famous just by sitting at home and visualizing. Without action, visualizing and focusing on our desires will produce few results, I think.
I do know people who have combined the mental exercises, proper attitudes, and coordinated activities to get what they want.
Some of the highest achievers among us do this on a regular basis, some consciously and some by instinct.
After all, if you really want a red bicycle, but you’re always talking and thinking about a baseball mitt, you’re not likely to get that bicycle, are you?
π
Act on your dream!
JD
.-= John Dilbeck´s last blog ..Think and Grow Rich test: Are you sarcastic and obnoxious? =-.
Great points, John. I don’t like getting too deep into the quantum physics either, though I love reading that stuff. It’s scary enough to realize that one day, all this energy will go away, as will the universe; I hope I didn’t scare anyone else. lol
Interesting connection with LOA and Laws of Gravity; I hadn’t considered the two. I will say this, though. The laws, so to speak, are more theory than anything else. We can prove the theory of gravity, but it can’t really be fully explained because the gravity we have on earth isn’t the same gravity as there is in the universe. Rules change based on mass and energy and speed; no, we best not go there either.
So, let’s come back to the main level. Plain and simple, thinking and doing positive things will bring you more positive results than doing and thinking negatively. Everyone knows that they have times when they feel good, and have lots of energy, and times when they feel bad and have little energy. They also usually know the catalyst for each. If all of us can figure out how to keep the positive feelings on most of the time, we’ll do better. And at that point, though I hate to say it, we’ll be thankful for those people who are accepting the negative energy we’re shedding.
Good morning, Mitch.
(I don’t really know what happened, but all I’m seeing in your reply is a big block of dark blue (maybe black) and blue text. These tired old eyes of mine can’t read any of it. I had to look at the source code to be able to reply. I’m using Firefox on a Mac.)
First, I want to apologize for picking nits about the physics. It’s kind of a pet peeve and watching The Secret reminded me that some of that was just unnecessary and incorrect. (During a former lifetime, I was going to become a physicist and even with what I believe to be a good grasp of math, quantum physics can still be a mind-bender.)
Regarding LOA and gravity, you’re exactly right that both are theories. The effects of gravity, however, are directly observable and consistently reproducible and therefore we can calculate and predict precisely how it will interact with objects in our universe (multiverse?). That gives theories related to gravity a much higher credence (to most people) than the fuzzy predictions and non-reproducible results of the LOA.
(By non-reproducible, I mean that the same actions will not cause the exact same results in all cases with all experimenters.)
It’s also why satellites can reliably be sent to various parts of our solar system with high levels of confidence that they will reach their targets.
So, just because they both have “Law” in their names, does not make them equal, although some people try to force that equality.
I’ve even tried discussing LOA with some people and questioned their statements and all I got was a response similar to, “It’s the law,” as if that was all that was required to prove their point – a classic case of self-referential authority.
I’m sorry. I don’t mean to keep going off topic on this. I’m not trying to be disruptive here.
“So, let’s come back to the main level. Plain and simple, thinking and doing positive things will bring you more positive results than doing and thinking negatively.”
Exactly. I think that sums it up very well. Of course, you can’t sell books, videos, CDs, ebooks, membership sites, access to private forums, or training if the LOA is that simple.
π
“If all of us can figure out how to keep the positive feelings on most of the time, we’ll do better.”
Not just keeping positive feelings, but making sure that what we are working towards is really aligned with what we want.
In the classic example, if someone is working to make more money, but is concentrating on and fearing debt and putting a lot of emotional energy into avoiding more debt, then the results probably won’t be what is really desired.
“And at that point, though I hate to say it, we’ll be thankful for those people who are accepting the negative energy we’re shedding.”
Do you think that is necessary?
It’s a huge multiverse. Do other people have to absorb the negative energy we release?
If I concentrate more on being healthy, does that mean someone else has to become less healthy?
I don’t think so.
I can’t prove it, of course, but it doesn’t ring true to me.
The converse is probably not true, either.
I can’t accept enough negative energy to make others more positive.
For example, I don’t think I can become poor enough to make others prosper.
I don’t think I can become sick enough to make someone else healthier.
Therefore, if I prosper, I don’t see how that has to make someone else poorer.
You know, Mitch, as much as I like thinking about these things, it gets fuzzy quickly and feels like a bunch of sophomores sitting up all night discussing fuzzy topics in a dorm room somewhere.
I’m not saying the topic isn’t important, however.
I should not be allowed to comment on someone’s blog before my second cup of coffee in the morning.
If you feel like we’re going way off topic from your original post, feel free to slap me on my hand and say, “Bad JD.”
π
All the best,
JD
.-= John Dilbeck´s last blog ..Think and Grow Rich test: Are you sarcastic and obnoxious? =-.
Hey John,
We’ll make our way back to the main premise of the laws of attraction, except for a brief detour to a Bugs Bunny reference, when he’s still hanging in the air saying “I heard you couldn’t do this because it’s against the laws of gravity, but I never studied law.”
Overall, we hope that people will use the laws of attraction to improve their lot in life. As for my comment on being thankful for someone else taking on the bad karma, well, it wasn’t necessarily meant literally, but the reality is that the laws of attraction talk about a balance in life of some sort. If a person has negative thoughts and pushes them away, to keep the balance either someone else has to take those bad thoughts, or they get spread out among a lot of people, which is more the case. That’s just how things go; we can’t all be happy at the same time, and based on reality it’s not even anything we have to worry about.
The part about “can it be proven?” Actually, I think it can. For every one of us who wants to be happy, there’s at least one person who doesn’t want you to be happy. Or else there’s something else about you they don’t want you to be. So, if you make it big, someone’s going to hate you for making it there, even if they didn’t know you all that well. The negative energy goes somewhere; it’s proven every day, unfortunately. Not everyone is happy for your success. And if you fail, someone is going to get pleasure out of it in some fashion.
That’s why I can say pretty much that I don’t wish negative feelings on anyone, because I don’t want my mind there. I figure there’s enough people rooting against me to pretty much take that on, and I really don’t care who has to feel bad for me to feel good, especially if I don’t do anything intentional to make someone else feel bad. As I wrote on this post in March 2008, Jack Canfield said Γ’β¬ΕWhat other people think about you is not your business.Γ’β¬Β
And there we go! π
Good morning, Mitch.
Your Bugs Bunny reference reminds me of Wile E. Coyote on the Roadrunner. He would always run off the cliff and hang in the air until he noticed there was nothing holding him up. Then it was a few seconds until we saw the little puff of dust on the canyon floor.
You make some good points.
I don’t really think much about the negative aspects of the Law of Attraction, and I think even less about people who would take pleasure in my failures.
In that respect, I’m a very lucky guy. I’ve managed to remove most of the negative people from my life and the ones I associate with now are all supportive, helpful, and positive.
I used to be a news junkie, but I’ve cut my consumption of news down to just a few headlines two or three times per week.
It actually feels better not seeing all the problems and hassles others are going through. Even though I know the negativity is out there, I’m not experiencing it as I did when I watched the news all the time.
I like the Jack Canfield quote.
I think it was Dr. Phil who said, “You wouldn’t worry so much about what other people thought of you if you knew how little they did.”
π
All the best,
JD
.-= John Dilbeck´s last blog ..Think and Grow Rich test: Do you think more about success or failure? =-.
I’m a pretty lucky guy most of the time myself, John. However, maybe it’s because I was in management for so long that I tend to think about all aspects of something before I do it, and even before I form an opinion on it.
So, while you can say you don’t think of the potential negative aspects of the LOA, it’s in my nature to do so. I don’t take anything at face value, not even chocolate (which is a stretch for me) because I realize that there are some things that even chocolate won’t make better; you know what I’m talking about. lol
Then, after I’ve considered all possible outcomes, I’ll decide on what I think is the best option, never the perfect option. But I realize this thing about balance and symmetry. It’s how we determine beauty, and it’s also how we determine function. It’s why we can’t have both matter and antimatter at the same time. It’s why we see things as good or bad, black or white, etc. Sure, there are shades here nad there, but it’s the things that balance us that make us what we are.
Wow, how metaphysical we’ve gotten, eh? lol
Good morning, Mitch.
I love talking metaphysics; it’s one of my avocations.
When you talk about examining all possible outcomes before making a decision or even forming an opinion, I don’t think of that as focusing on the negatives.
For most of my previous life, I was a programmer, consultant, and systems analyst/administrator.
Each of those required that I do my best to consider all possible outcomes and be prepared ahead of time to deal with each of them.
It meant that I was always looking for problems and things others would never consider.
Some programmers call it being prepared for “the monkey on the keyboard” who may type anything, no matter what we request nor how many examples we offer for proper responses.
I’ve had more than one person tell me I look at the world as a glass half-empty and I just don’t think that’s true. If I hadn’t been an optimist all my life, I don’t think I would have been able to do what I have. I think they were just misconstruing my comments when I kept looking for problems that had to be considered beforehand so we could avoid them once the new systems were in place.
The same thing applies to managers and business owners. We have to consider as many possible outcomes as we can forecast. That’s just exercising prudent caution.
When I say focusing on the negatives, I’m thinking in terms of someone who would deliberately take pleasure in someone’s failure, or who would try to hurt someone else in order to gain something.
Like you, I don’t take much at face value, but I make certain exceptions and that would include chocolate just about any time and most certainly coffee first thing in the morning.
π
All the best,
JD
.-= John Dilbeck´s last blog ..Think and Grow Rich test: Are you permitting someone to worry you? =-.