This post will be a quick response to some criticisms and misunderstandings about my last post about The Secret. Then, in a few days, I’ll post something new about levels of cognitive development as outlined by the great Jean Piaget. I think you’ll find this discussion to be particularly interesting.
Okay, onward. Someone posted a comment charging that Ken Wilber’s and my definition of magical thinking is “vague” and “not backed up by concrete examples.” It isn’t vague at all. First of all…
…you can check out Ken’s book, Sex, Ecology, Spirituality, for 51 detailed pages about magical thinking, offering an academically rigorous description accepted by pretty much all developmental psychologists and based on research that has been accepted by the mainstream for at least 70 or 80 years, done by the great Jean Piaget (and others).
I don’t have the time here to go into the details of these 51 pages (plus quite a few pages of end notes), and most of you would not want to delve into this as deeply and in as academic a manner as Ken has done. If you are interested, though, google Jean Piaget, and get a copy of Sex, Ecology, Spirituality and read it (it is a brilliant book, though quite a tome–about 850 pages).
The bottom line is that there is NO QUESTION that 1) all people go through a stage of magical thinking while growing up, 2) that some people, especially if traumatized during this stage, continue to think this way into adulthood, 3) that some societies’ entire center of gravity is at this stage, and that magical thinkers are part of all societies, including those of developed nations, and that 4) that this sort of thinking is definitely less functional and less resourceful than that of later stages.
My next post, which will describe development in what is called the cognitive line, should clear up some of the desire for “more examples.”
I was also asked about the difference between “putting it out to the universe” (which I have labeled as magical thinking) and “focusing your attention on what you want” (which I have strongly advocated). The assumption was that focusing on what you want is magical thinking, too, and that I’m being inconsistent in advocating it while at the same pointing out the drawbacks of magical thinking.
So let me clarify the destinction between the two. Magical thinking, in adults, involves 1) wishing for or believing that the normal laws of nature can be suspended, so that 2) one can get something (generally FOR HIM OR HERSELF, or someone in their immediate group rather than for the good of society as a whole) 3) with little or no effort, or without somehow paying any sort of price or doing something for it (in other words, getting something for nothing).
This way of looking at how to get something in the world is pre-rational, in the sense that it fails to see that to get an effect, there must be a cause–that to get something, you must DO something to get it, and that what you do to get something or create something is subject to the normal laws of physics.
This perspective is also narcissistic in the sense that it wants something for ME–but without actually doing something, paying some sort of price, being of service in some way, etc. It’s the idea that other people, or the universe in general, should provide you with whatever you want, just because you want it (as opposed to you doing something to get it). It’s the idea that you can or should get what you want without taking conventional actions or giving something in return.
In developmental psychology, narcissism doesn’t mean an unhealthy obsession with thinking only about yourself (the common pop psychology view). Narcissism actually means that you can’t think about yourself. The capacity for self-reflexive awarness doesn’t exist yet, so the world is seen as an extension of yourself. Because the distinction between me and not-me is still fuzzy, the narcissist is unable to take the perspective of another person. This makes it seem as if it’s all about them–and that when they put out to the universe a wish or desire it will be (or ought to be) granted. This is how a small child thinks–mommy and daddy will grant my wishes (and I’ll be plenty pissy if they don’t). This is a reasonable perspective for children, but not for adults.
Focusing your attention on what you want, on the other hand, is the first step in a much more mature process of taking action to achieve something in the world. It involves no suspension of the laws of nature, but rather is a cooperation with those laws. And though the outcome might involve ME getting something I want, it’s not totally self-centered because it realizes that 1) I must take action to get what I want (I can’t just wish for it, or assume that the universe is here to give me what I want whether or not I do anything in return), and 2) the action must somehow be of value in some way, or must actually have an effortful, cause and effect connection to what I want.
If I want to be an author, I must learn to write, I must spend time writing, and I must write something people want to read.
To get money, I must provide something to those who are (hopefully) going to give up their money, and it must be something they (not I) believe is at least as valuable as the money.
To get love, the giver of the love must also get something in return–it’s a circle, a relationship, not a one-way street. Yes, I know, real love is freely given, but if you want love and give no love in return, you’re going to have to find someone who is a saint in order to be loved, and most people aren’t saints. As the Beatles said, the love you get is equal to the love you give (or something like that).
To get someone’s time or attention, I must do something that makes the person want to give up that time or attention.
To get a better job, I must look for one, show up for interviews, show the prospective employer how I will benefit him or her, I must have skills that are wanted, and so forth.
Whatever I do must be of value or in some way have a cause and effect relationship to what I want in return. This is basic “Law of Attraction” stuff, and very different than just “putting it out to the universe.” The first involves the Wish Fairy. The second involves you doing something to get what you want.
And, by the way, as a person moves to higher levels of development, one’s focus moves more and more to what can be done for others, rather than what one gets for oneself. To do this, one’s developmental perspective must move to a place where you can take the perspective of other, something magical thinkers have trouble doing. This other-oriented perspective is what I described as being at work in my own life, where my needs are now met to such a high degree that my own needs, while of course important to me, are just no longer what I focus on (you don’t focus on finding food when your stomach is full).
Instead, I focus on meeting your needs. As a result, my needs are automatically met (again, the Law of Attraction at work). Any fear of whether or not my needs will be met is gone, and my focus is now about helping others–which also makes my life very fulfilling. This is the stage Maslow describes as “self-actualization.” In order to reach this stage, other levels of need fulfillment must first be met: physiological needs, safety needs, love/belonging/social needs, esteem needs, cognitive needs, and aesthetic needs. Because these needs are met in my case, I no longer focus on them. I am, however, as a teacher, endeavoring to help people who have not yet been able to handle these lower levels of need fulfillment, and one of the roadblocks to doing so is often magical thinking.
It was also pointed out that I endorse The Sedona Method, which the writer claims to be magical thinking. The Sedona Method, the writer claims, says that “releasing wants” causes the objects of one’s desires to manifest. This is, however, not at all what the Sedona Method says. The Sedona Method is a way of letting go of attachments (or aversions) and the emotions that go with them, and is based on a thinking perspective at the much later Integral or Transcendent level of development. It’s a quick way to get yourself out of what I have often referred to as The Game of Black and White, where the main game rule is “White Must Win.” Your ideas about good and bad, and the emotions that such ideas create are, according to the Sedona Method, illusion, and releasing them leads to freedom.
Hale Dwoskin, the main teacher of the Sedona Method, has never said that releasing is a way to manifest your desires–though he has said that people who release are happier, and ironically such people do tend to get more of whatever they need. Someone who sees the Sedona Method as a way to “get stuff” is looking at it, in fact, from a magical perspective, and then thinking that their projection is intrinsically part of the method, when in fact the magic is coming from them.
In fact, Hale asks people to release not just negative emotions (aversions), but positive ones, too (attachments). I don’t have room here to go into the genius of The Sedona Method, but it’s really just a skillful way to experientially demonstrate a non-dual perspective, based on the same point of view expressed by all enlightened individuals throughout history. Behind the actual methodology, the Sedona Method is based on the point that all ideas about anything–and the emotions generated by those ideas–are illusory, and that when you drop all of this mentally generated conceptual stuff, you see that everything is pure happiness, bliss, and perfection. At some point I will go into this much more deeply. There is, however, nothing magical about it.
Confusing the Sedona Method with magic is a great example of the pre/post fallacy I mentioned in my last post, where post-conventional and preconventional views are confused because both are “not conventional.” However, there is a huge difference between pre- and post-conventional.
I was also asked if I think shamanism is a legitimate pathway to transcendental consciousness, since I have said that magical thinkers want to revive “ancient ways” as a solution to modern problems, and have said that this is not a solution. In fact, I cited this as an example of regressive thinking (see my discussion of the “pre/post fallacy” in my last post). First of all, I didn’t specifically mention shamanism. But for your information, I know several shamans and I participate, actually quite regularly, in several very powerful shamanic practices. I don’t see these practices, though, from a magical perspective, but rather from the perspective I’m currently living from. In fact–and this is really the key to all such questions asked by many of you–everyone sees whatever they are experiencing from whatever perspective they are at.
Shamanism, in general, DOES come from a magical perspective, though it’s very possible that some modern shamans are operating at perspectives beyond preconventional (I know at least one who is). Here is the key: if a person is coming from a preconventional, magical point of view, they will interpret whatever they experience, whatever they see, from that view. If a preconventional shaman drinks Ayahuasca (a powerful plant-based brew that creates mystical experiences), for instance, they will interpret the experiences they have from that perspective, that point of view. If they heal their clients, that healing will be interpreted from that preconventional point of view.
It’s the interpretation that is magical, not whatever they are doing, per se. If a shaman gives someone sacred plants in order to put them in an altered state, their interpretation will be that certain spirits in the plants created the person’s experience (a magical view), whereas I might say that certain chemical substances in the plants created certain profound shifts in consciousness (all of which can be explained in a non-magical way), and that these shifts in awareness are similar to those attained when someone meditates many hours a day for many years.
I was also asked about esp and paranormal abilites. First of all, as another poster said, magician James Randi has a foundation (the James Randi Educational Foundation), one goal of which is to support research into paranormal claims in controlled, scientific experimental conditions. The foundation offers a prize (currently one million dollars) to anyone who can demonstrate paranormal abilities under controlled, scientific conditions. Though the size of the prize has grown over the years, Randi has offered some sort of financial prize since 1964. No one has ever demonstrated anything that allowed them to claim the prize. You can google James Randi, or look him up on Wikipedia to learn more about this.
But let’s say for the sake of argument that there are paranormal abilities out there. Maybe there are, though it’s interesting that no such claims have ever passed the peer-review process (where a study showing such abilities is shown to be repeatable). There are plenty of people claiming that there are studies proving paranormal abilities, but none of them have been accepted by the general scientific community, because they have not been demonstrated to be repeatable (and, many of these studies are clearly ill-formed).
But again, let’s say that paranormal abilities exist. Just as with shamanism, any such abilities will be interpreted from the developmental level of the person who is observing them. A magical thinker will see them as evidence of magic. A conventional thinker will probably think they are bullshit, unless there is some evidence, in which case they will see, or at least begin to look for, a rational explanation. A post-conventional or integral thinker will see these abilities in still other ways (which we don’t have room to go into here). And so forth. Whatever developmental level a person is at, that perspective will determine their interpretation of what they see.
ANYTHING that happens, any experience, anywhere, will be interpreted from the point of view of the interpreter’s perspective (ie, their developmental level). If what people call paranormal abilities exist, they aren’t proof of magic, or of the suspension of the laws of nature, any more than electricity or magnetism or the aurora borealis are evidence of magic. All of these were, at one point, seen as magic (and still are by cultures with a magical center of gravity). Now we know what causes them–and it ain’t magic.
The claim was also made that Ken Wilber is “biased” against earlier levels of development. When people say something like this, it leads me to believe that they either haven’t read him or, if they have, they didn’t understand what they read. Levels of development are perspectives. By definition, a wider, more inclusive perspective sees things more clearly. Such a perspective isn’t better in an “I’m better than you” sense, but it is more resourceful and more complete. It’s a wider view. It takes into account more of the existing interrelationships. This particular writer sets up a straw man (in other words, argues against something I never said) when he says, “…are adults “better” than babies, and if so, should be throw them out?” Neither Ken, nor I, have ever said that someone at a higher level of development is “better,” and no one is saying that a child’s perspective is WRONG. It’s just the perspective they have, given their experience of life, so far. It is, though, less complete, less inclusive, less broad–and less functional.
Neither have Ken nor I said that people at lower levels of development should be “thrown out.” In fact, everyone (as both of us have said many times), starts at square one and must go through each level, in order, just as an embryo must go through certain physiological developmental stages, in order. Many people stop at lower levels of development either because that’s where their culture’s or family’s center of gravity is or because they suffered some sort of trauma which arrests their growth. But because everyone starts at the beginning, there will always be people at every level of development.
We don’t condemn children for being at their particular level of development, but we do help them to move on to the next level when they are ready (which is when the previous level stops working as a way of making sense of their world).
And, as an aside, while someone is at a certain level of development what we’re really hoping for is a healthy manifestation of that level. There are healthy and unhealthy versions of every level of development. Life can fail to work at any developmental level if a person is exhibiting a pathological version of that level. Or it can fail to work because their environment changes and their current level no longer works or makes sense in that environment (for instance, when a young child goes off to school, or an college graduate enters the work force). Either way, something needs to be done either to create a healthy way of being at the current level or, if necessary, to get the person to the next level.
This is, in fact, very much what my work with you is all about. I’m helping you become more functional at your current level, or helping you move to the next level in your growth. The first is called horizontal development, while the latter is called vertical development. Both are valuable (and both are strongly facilitated by Holosync, and by the knowledge products we offer at Centerpointe).
The same writer said that “infantile desires (for security, for stimulation, etc.) are at the root of all adults’ rational thoughts,” and that if we eliminate magical thinking we eliminate everything that’s built upon it, including rational and post rational thought.
First, infantile desires are NOT at the root of all adult thought. Infantile desires are at the root of the thoughts of adults who are at an infantile level of development. Some adults actually have moved on to more mature, more highly developed, ways of being in the world. That’s what development is all about. It’s true that each level builds on those that went before, transcending and including, to use Ken’s terminology. Transcending, though, means that the unworkable aspects of the previous level are transcended, while the parts that are necessary building blocks are included. Belief in magic isn’t a necessary building block, so it is (hopefully) transcended as the move to the next higher level is made.
Consider this in terms of development in the physical world. At some point some amount of time after the Big Bang, atoms developed into molecules. Molecules transcend atoms, in the sense that molecules have attributes atoms do not and cannot have. They also include the atoms as building blocks, but at the same time they have jetisoned some of the ways of being in the world that were common to atoms. Those ways are gone, even though the atoms are still there as parts of the molecule (oxygen in a water molecule does not behave in the same way it did when it was free oxygen).
In the same way, some aspects of how you see the world are building blocks for the next level, the next perspective, but some of what went on at the lower level is lost, gone, ditched. It is transcended by better ways of existing. We don’t need to keep magical thinking in order to develop, so it is (in a healthy person) transcended. Little bits of it remain in the way we cross our fingers or carry a lucky charm for good luck or wish upon a star, but few people really believe that such things actually are the cause of what happens.
Again, I’ve never said that we should get rid of magical thinkers. I didn’t even say that people should necessarily give up that sort of thinking. I said that no one goes to the next developmental stage until the previous stage doesn’t work for them any longer. So, let me be clear here. I am saying–to those who read this and are hoping that some sort of magic, some sort of suspension of the laws of nature, some sort of narcissistic wishing for your needs to be met without you doing anything in return is a good way to succeed in the world–IF you are struggling to get by, if you can’t make enough money, IF you cannot get a fulfulling life going, IF you are frustrated about your ability to create a good relationship, get a good job, make enough money, or in some way are having trouble succeeding in the world…it may very well be that magical thinking isn’t a very resourceful way to be in the world, and you might consider giving it up in favor of a way of being in the world that works better.
So, with that off my chest, with my next post I’m going to go into Piaget and his model of cognitive development (rather than flogging this dead horse any longer). MANY peoples’ comments have argued against things I never said–which is one reason why I’ve ignored most of them–and I suspect that such comments will continue, no matter how careful I am to be clear about what I say. I will strive to be more clear, so as to diminish the possibility that people will misunderstand, but I don’t have room to write a book about each topic, or to cover every possible contingency, exception, or possible misinterpretation.
I hope you’re all finding this interesting and helpful.
Be well.
On a completely different note:
Genpo Roshi (the highest ranking Zen master in the world outside of Japan) and I will be presenting a two-day workshop in Los Angeles on February 9th & 10th. Working with Genpo in person is AMAZING. Though he probably wouldn’t toot his own horn, I can: Genpo is a true enlightened master. At the same time, he’s also a regular person. He’s an American, rides a Harley, drinks beer–and I’ve never met anyone who is so comfortable in his own skin and so naturally embodies what enlightenment is all about.
He’s also an amazing teacher. His Big Mind process is, in my opinion and in the opinion of a lot of other people (including Ken Wilber and the incredibly highly evolved people that hang around with him) the biggest innovation in spiritual growth of the last several hundred years. (And that’s saying something.)
Why do I say this? Because this process allows you to directly experience transcendent states of oneness and enlightened awareness that ordinarily take decades of meditation to attain–but in less than three hours! I’ve even seen hardened reform school kids do this process, and in doing it speak from this transcendent state, saying the same things the Buddha said, in the same words. When you go into this state, everything is obvious, and you report the same insights that come with enlightenment–because you’re there. (Admittedly, this is a peak experience of Big Mind, and to fully embody this state you must do some sort of daily practice–such as Holosync–but a peak experience of this sort is REALLY a peak experience!)
Genpo and I share a desire to take what has been esoteric and share it with as many people as possible, so though Genpo still leads some traditional Zen trainings, he’s moving toward teaching to a broader group of people. What we’re doing is taking the essence of the wisdom of enlightenment and presenting it, without any unnecessary cultural trappings, so everyone can benefit from it.
So in this seminar I’ll be providing the context, the explanation. I will be providing the frame that allows you to make sense of the experience, while Genpo will provide the experience.
The Big Mind process does more than show you enlightened states, however. How could there be more than that, you ask? As part of the Big Mind process, Genpo will ask you to speak from certain internal voices, certain aspects of yourself. Speaking from these voices, what a psychologist might call “sub-personalities,” heals any shadow material in these aspects of yourself. This creates huge shifts, huge positive changes. And, quite frankly, I’ve never seen anyone more skillful at working with people than Genpo.
So, I’d like to invite you to be at this workshop. It will be February 9-10 in Los Angeles, and it will be, I promise, a truly life-changing event. Anyone who has been to a Centerpointe retreat knows that my events are life-changing, and I can vouch for the fact that spending two days with Genpo Roshi will give you (and I really mean this) years of growth in one weekend.
To find out how to sign up for a 25% discount, please visit our registration page while your thinking about it by click on the following link.
Register for Big Mind / Big Heart Now!
If this link doesn’t work for some reason, type www.centerpointe.com/bigmind directly into into your browser.
And, after Thanksgiving, I’ll be sharing a new post about levels of cognitive development. This is, I promise, some fascinating stuff.
Be well.
Hi Bill, I am so glad you spoke of The Secret as you did. I ‘got’ the part about doing and others things that were barely mentioned in The Secret. However, one person I know, well into this journey in her consciuosness, did not hear them and was a sceptic because of it. My sister was very much of the magical thinking and angry when I tried to tell her what it said and what I felt it was missing, as she so wanted to believe in her magical thinking……..what I felt it was missing other than making bigger what it did not about ‘doing’ etc., was being non attached or at least less attached to outcome, and to be in gratitude in the present. The biggest problem for me was that it doesn’t address what Holosync address’. ….how to really change our inner way of experiencing and viewing our lives……..how to ‘wake up’!!!
On another note,
I loved Thresholds of the Mind…………..everything you mentioned, accept the ‘end’ result, the reason for doing it, i’ve known deeply, but not consistently.
As a matter of fact, I knew to know these things and live in a certain consc.,to get out of a severe stress response, I disconnected from other aspects. Holosync is triggering old stuff and i’m much less the very separate observer than i had been as it is triggering an out of body anxiety, where i used to ‘live’.
Some days are filled with many consc. in a brief period of time… varying degrees of disconnect, of not being in flow, then a day here and there, more flow than ever. i know it’s a fear response……I’m very excited about this…….i believe the brain, the hypothalmus will be greatly affected by holosync and i believe my bodies chronic flight, fear and stress response from early childhood got me as sick as i am with environmental illness….from the investigating i’ve done, ..I do not believe chemicals, for the most part cause this. i believe it is the response of the limbic system, particularly the hypothalmus to stress, etc.
Thank you so much for all your hard work. I so appreciate your very grounded view and honesty. Sincerely, Lynn Fabry
I have not read the previous controversy but this article is indeed most interesting, clear, helpful and makes so much sense.
Bill writes: “…are adults “better” than babies, and if so, should be throw them out?” Neither Ken, nor I, have ever said that someone at a higher level of development is “better,” and no one is saying that a child’s perspective is WRONG.”
Ken Wilber goes to great lengths to convey that transcending to higher levels does not make one “better” than another, a point one WOULD have gotten with any reading of his numerous publications.
This is a recurring issue throughout the ages. How often do we hear “having more money doesn’t make you better than me”? On the surface, this appears true. But consider this point. Ceteris peribus (latin for all else being equal), if two people are exactly the same, would you rather have more money or less money? Answered honestly (for one could donate all his monies to charity), one would of course rather have more money than less. If that means one would rather be the fellow with more money, than we must conclude that that person is better (off) – again, all else being equal.
Secondly, something that is made up of a lower form (like a molecule vs. an atom) is of a higher nature. Wilber proposes that the higher levels of existance encompass the lower ones. Again, would you rather be at a level that incoporates all the others, or be at a level lower? To the extent that one would choose the former, one could say that being at higher levels is “better” than being at lower ones.
None of this, however, is to say that being at any given state (be it richer or poorer, more enlightened or less enlightened” is to be judged as negative or unacceptable. Children progress from pure ego to mostly ego with time. The fact that they start with pure ego doesn’t make them any less valuable in a human sense, but one does hope that they mature with time….. Spike
Regarding yogananda and miracles, just because you have no evidence for something doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen, including dematerialising bodies and so on, to say that it doesn’t happen, because you haven’t seen it is a little naive – basically you are calling yogananda and various other saints liars, which i personally doubt
once people thought the world was flat, no evidence, see of other ways of seeing, so to repeat, just because you don’t see ‘evidence’ does not mean it it not true, it is unlikely yogananda was lying, it is likely there are other ways of manipulating consciousness, that maybe highly evolved saints are capable of (not your normal run of the mill bloke it has to be said) could just mean you are at a lower level of consciousness than is possible to see that —–
lol
rachel
I don’t get a chance to read the blog very often, but a large part of my own doctoral research focused on the correlation between individual consciousness and cultural evolution (there is a direct link between the development of consciousness in individuals and the development of culture (the “collective mind” if you will).
. but Ken Wilber, Jean Gebser, Allan Combs, Bela H. Banathy all presented arguments for this individual/cultural correlation of development. Wilber is marginalized by the academic world, but Combs & Banathy are highly respected scholars. Banathy’s argument is not only that there is a correlation of evolutionary development, since human evolution is cultural (cultural evolution superceded biological evolution during the cro-magnon period), we are able to guide and influence our own evolution, personally as individuals and collectively as cultures. Our future is in our own hands (or minds)
I can’t paste the table here (or post chapters of my dissertation that would put most people to sleep
Bill, I’d be happy to send you my research if you’re interested in learning about other researchers and theorists who have written on the subject.
I will be sure to spend more time here. I live for ‘rules’ to live by…
“The Secret” most telling problem is the number of people who after viewing it disregard reality for their own brand of magical thinking.
“Everyone sees whatever they are experiencing from whatever perspective they are at.”
If you could walk in my shoes you would be me.
The moment you ‘notice’ your ‘experience’ you lose it. (Being in the moment ain’t easy.)
All upsets (problems, anger and every negative) are caused by your expectations.
(Happiness is easy once you know you only have to change your own expectations…)
The pursuit of happiness is a waste of time.
Perspective, use it or lose it.
Argue for your limitations and sure enough they are yours.
If it ain’t broke, break it.
The way to get what you want is want what you got.
Whatever you resist persists.
Security is a superstition.
Success is an imposter.
“Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn’t go away”.
I live in paradise, somewhere outside of North America.
Great post Bill,
To me, magical thinking has been at the root of most peoples interpretation of “The secret”. I have to admit that I dismissed the secet off hand as magical thinking when I first saw it. I was amazed however at the number of friends and clients that asked me about it. I appreciate your clarification of the mischaracterizations they used in your interviews. I sincerely appreciate the way you are taking the time to dissect this issue with your subscribers. I will refer people to this answer from now on as it is the most clear and cogent exposition of the problems with “the (over-hyped) Secret” I have seen. –Hugh
Bill, Your Holosync has changed my life because I have learned through Holosyncing (sp?) to be aware of my thoughts…yes, it was that simple. But I have also been a “magic thinker” not a doer. It is not an exaggeration for me to say that I have “put it out to God, the Universe and have received it without any action except sitting quietly and accepting that it has arrived…literally including money.One not uncommon example was the time I needed 6 thousand dollars in 3 days. I sat quietly for hours and finally got up to go to my appointment with my nutritionist. I casually asked her whether she knew of someone who would give me 6 thousand dollars and she told me to call a certain someone. Case in point: I did call, I got the money from this stranger, no strings attached. This a small story of the many, many Magical miracles. The bible says something like ‘ask anything of the Father, believe He has done it and it is yours, but first forgive thy brother as the father has forgiven you’ (which I believe means one must first have a pure heart). It does not say ask and go work your butt off. I still love your stuff but I could go on and on about my stories and my friends stories of magical thinking materializing without action but I still would not be as proficient at it if I did not Holosync.
So much sand, so many deserts to cross … be happy, be blessed that we have a friend like Bill to help us in our journeys … may we rise above, enjoy the life we have as we carve the life we want, leave the nits to pick themselves, and thank whatever entity it is we thank that we’re here to do it at all.
The tea and cakes invite to Cambridge, UK, still stands any time, Bill
.
Love Tally x
Hello Bill,
Thank you many times over for your comitment, love and patience to all people and participants of Holosync and Centerpointe. Critics and avid followers alike.
This may sound terribly unintellegent compared with others highly thought out comments but I feel saddened by the time that is wasted defending, istead of teaching.
I think we have all heard of the expression “don’t put your all eggs in one basket.” Yet, so many are determined to argue their point of view or the person’s point of view they have attached themselves and “their” beliefs to. I feel that so many are missing the point entirely, instead of recieving the teachings that are meant for thier enlightenment, they are instead picking and proding, trying so desperately to disprove what they signed up for (to help better their lives) to begin with. When is it that the pupils became the teachers or teachers helpers?
Isn’t balance and oneness, acceptance of all people, opinions and ways of thinking and interpreting? Should we not invest ourselves into and learn from all sources, not determining whether they seem right or wrong, if they help us to find and use the tools we need for our sucess.
That is what we came to do, or just me?
I loved The Secret and I love Holosync because they were created for the betterment of man/womenkind.
It is painfully true, and a shame, that we really can not please all people, but please keep up the great work any how!
Take care,
NW
I enjoy writing sci-fi and fantasy for adolescents as my retirement hobby. Yet have never looked upon the concept of “magic” as real. To me it belongs to a world of creativity, is a form of parable, where the story can end well, be uplifting and fun to read. As with drawings of creatures and dragons, it is surreal, meant more for entertainment, a temporary escape, than as a substitute for rationality and the real world. Bill helps to put that real world into perspective.
Having read, and seen the “Secret”, I did not identify with the concepts in it as some kind of affirmation that “magic” does exits in reality…I have fun with that idea. However, there are those out there who take every word in that book quite literally. Their gullibilty is based on desperation and lack of self-esteem, which is so so prevalent. But this can be changed by taking action, making an effort.
Bill has respoded very well. And yes, as a former video and film editor, I can see how the deleted content of what he may have said while filming the “SECRET” ended in the deleted bin.
Our society is plagued with an onslaught of information, some of which is of value and does enhance our lives, much of it is garbage and full of false promises and “the easy way ” which never ever works…… The harsh reality is that without making a conscious effort to enhance one’s abilities, potential for improvement, (enrolling in the Holosync program is part of what I am engaged in) one cannot expect to merely twitch one’s nose to make whatever one wants to happen appear. LOL
I apologize for the length of my comments. Not familiar with Blogging, I had no idea that the volume of reading would be this large. My apology for making it even longer.
Appendage: The fact that we can hear our own thoughts and see our own dreams is a kind of “magic” also don’t you think? What science can disprove that….they have been able to prove that the brain thinks…but what it invents? Magic. I am smiling
Hi Bill,
You wrote “But let’s say for the sake of argument that there are paranormal abilities out there. Maybe there are, though it’s interesting that no such claims have ever passed the peer-review process (where a study showing such abilities is shown to be repeatable). There are plenty of people claiming that there are studies proving paranormal abilities, but none of them have been accepted by the general scientific community, because they have not been demonstrated to be repeatable (and, many of these studies are clearly ill-formed).”
This is untrue. In the west such research is poorly published but it does exist. In Russia and China however it is very well researched. This constant denial in the West by the stupid, blind, ignorant, lying, cheating apes that pretend to be Scientists has to stop. You should look into this in more depth before you make such statements.
The problem is the western consciousness is poorly developed, short sighted.
All the arangements about levels of consciousness you make are nothing more that opinion arranged to fit an unprovable paradigm and can be easily challenged. For Example, “Magical Thinking” is given a very low rating in your missive but it actually comes full circle as you fully develope yourself and becomes “Magical Thinking” becomes transcendent mode of thinking. Whereas taking the view that Good/Evil are simply points of view is not trancendent at all. It is in fact the lowest form of thinking, it is infact insane and clearly so. It is a state of disconnectedness from others and the universe, where true empathy cannot be experienced. It is childish, silly and very very dangerous. It’s the sort of thinking, you would expect from a Hitler!
Hi Bill,
Thanks for everything.
I finally found something I can disagree with you about.
First, the title; “Bill answers his critics”? I’m not sure everyone who doesn’t agree with you here is a ‘critic’. Probably only a tiny few would fit that description.
Secondly, I get what you’re saying about a child having a magical understanding of the universe; and the need to develop an action based
personal responsibility model for adulthood. Indeed I needed to hear that.
Yet it is a fantastic leap of logic to go from there to the assumption that
psychic phenomena that goes beyond the lab-repeatable, 5 senses, consensus reality paradigm, simply does not exist!
Citing James Randi as some sort of bastion of open-minded scientific researcher startled me…Let alone taking the fact that he hasn’t seen fit to give away his challenge money, as evidence that psychic phenomena doesn’t exist.
As you repeatedly state, we interpret and perceive data from our perspectives. If our perspectives don’t allow for the existence of something that we come across we find ways to explain it away; including saying
it’s not repeatable to the point of being accepted in most mainstream “scientific” peer review forums, etc. (And even though there are plenty of scientists on the other side of the aisle, including many who have changed their views on such matters, they are passed off as, “out of the mainstream”…or even more regularly, simply ignored.
By the way, Randi is a perfect example of explaining away all data which is beyond his paradigm. He is a sleight of hand illusionist. He can make it look like he is bending a spoon with mind power. If he sees someone bending a spoon with mind power, he assumes it’s sleight of hand and says, “I can do that. It’s just a parlor trick. You don’t get my money.”
Bill, I’d love to know what your list entails of things that don’t exist. Reincarnation? Remote viewing? Communicating with people who have passed on? Parallel universes? Other worldly beings? Clairvoyance?
Telepathy?
Whatever your list includes, do you really think that it’s a lower stage of development most people are in who don’t share your list?
Are you really implying that people who believe in such, are struggling, not making the money they want, not having the relationships they desire or the satisfaction they deserve from life and not as developed, satisfied, fulfilled in relationships, jobs and life, in general, as those of you who reject such notions?
The primary flaw I see in your reasoning is bunching together the cognitive developmental stage of childlike thinking with various metaphysical / parapsychological fields of inquiry. And then you kind of do your own straw man argument stating that if these things exist, there are
scientific explanations we’ve yet to grok which explain them, and hence, they are not “magical”.
Yes, EXACTLY. (And I don’t think any of your “critics” are arguing for the term “magical”.)
It’s been 20some years since I read SUPERNATURE by Biologist Lyle Watson (And I can only imagine the data that has since come out that would be in the book if he wrote it today) but it’s a great read for getting that the supernatural is indeed part of nature. And then there’s the work of Cleve (Baxter(?), I think) the former FBI polygraph expert who stunned us
with the research gleamed by hooking up plants and then human cells to his polygraph equipment. The evidence of the reality of non-accepted
“unscientific”, non-peer review accepted phenomena is overwhelming.
Look at the work of Dr. Ian Stevenson on reincarnation — (among my favorite insights from him is how birth marks are death marks from a previous existence.)
Surely Bill, everything doesn’t have to be either / or. For instance, your
interpretation of the chemical reaction of the brain to the substances in Ayahuasca in no way has to invalidate the shamanistic perspective of the spirits of the plant world. Both could be valid and counterparts of each other.
I’m guessing that you would look at the brain research that shows that the classic near death experience can be induced by physically, surgically probing certain areas of the brain, as evidence of NDE’s not being “real”.
Whereas, the surgeon who has done more research in this field than anyone, Dr. Melvin Morse, sees that as the physical counterpart to the very real experience. He would say the brain connects to the world of spirit, but the world of spirit still exists when that connection is severed for good, (as in, death). And I don’t think his position on the subject is an indication that his stage of development is less than yours.
(By the way, I’ll bet my life that James Randi would tout that brain probe / NDE phenomena as UNDENIABLE PROOF that NDE’s are imaginary and invalid. Furthermore, I think it’s a huge mistake to assume that Randi’s stage of development and yours are the same, merely because you guys don’t believe in certain metaphysical phenomena.)
Bill, this area of disagreement with many of your students really doesn’t
hold a candle to the importance of the work you do for us. And I, for one,
am glad to realize you don’t know everything. It was getting downright
spooky for me there for a while.
You’re Amazing!
Bosco
Dear Mr. Bill,
You seem VERY emotionally attached to your views which is a little bit disappointing. Makes me think twice about buying Holosync. The fact of the matter is that the great book says,”WHATSOEVER ye desire when you pray, BELIEVE that you receive AND YE shall receive”. Either this is true or false. It doesn’t say “Whatsoever ye desire, if you WORK HARD for it and if it is reasonable…if it’s not crazy like thinking you can cure yourself of cancer without medicine…thinking you can find an ideal mate based purely on affirming it [i.e. not "getting out there" going to clubs, etc., etc]…it says WHATSOEVER”.
By your own admission, a belief is not “good” or “bad” in and of itself, it’s a question of whether or not a belief serves you. You may call what the secret teaches as “magical” thinking and while it may not work for you, as it has been proven, the job of the mind is to negate any and everything that opposes one’s subconscious beliefs (as well as those things for which we don’t have the neuro conditioning for).
John Assaraf cured himself of a condition that required 25 pills a day with “magical” thinking, I’ve personally manifested things that eluded me via physical efforts (i.e. “working hard” for it the conventional way) by nothing more than making mind mind accept something as true despite the fact that I had no 5 sensory evidence to support it – individuals with your beliefs may call this a “coincidence” but I’m sorry, this great universe is too orderly for me to ever believe in “coincidence” – by the way, do you know what the work “coincidence” really means??
I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that allowing oneself to have a mental attitude of total assurance despite the fact that the only “evidence” I had was spiritual truth. In other words, I allowed myself to adopt a belief based on more than 5 sensory evidence (once I realized how much our senses can deceive us…but our inner knowing won’t).
In your blog, you contend that “you” have no evidence of what the Secret purports as being true and hence you don’t believe it. Well, let’s think about what a belief is:
A belief = Information + Experience * Repetition.
There are 6.5 billion people on the planet. There are billions of books and other information sources. Please accept the fact that with 6.5 billion people on the planet (each one having had experiences of a varying degree….millions I am sure have had consistent results with “magical thinking)…with that, plus countless studies of their experiences and perhaps even scientific work done that you aren’t aware of…..The fact of the matter is that you seem to be basing your belief only on that which your mental processing of information accepts as true. Have considered using your own Holosync material to program a belief in “magical thinking” then seeing what results materialize in your life. I would imagine, like every human being, you too have some learning and growing to do.
Please, please accept the fact that just because YOU haven’t experienced something and YOU haven’t read about it doesn’t mean it’s not true or real. Please accept that fact that many of the great bibles of the world do teach that the belief is what creates the fact, and they don’t assign ANY contingencies to this.
It’s so hard for human being to believe in the UNLIMITED potential of the mind, I believe you are doing individuals a great dis-service by trying to tell people to “come down to earth”. Some 500 years ago, it was magical thinking to believe that something without wings could fly. After all, there was no study, no physical evidence, no information present by way of the 5 senses that would lead any sane person to believe that something (let alone man) without wings could fly.
Yet those who adopted “magical thinking” allowed themselves to believe something based on “evidence” arrived outside of what the 5 senses could gather or interpret. And, the rest was history.
The fact of the matter is that thought can and does affect physical matter on the plank scale. I’d probably still be doubting this myself but for seeing my brother do it right in front of my eyes. If pure intent can bend metal, it can do other things to physical things and conditions.
I think as human beings we are so wedded to the notion that we have to “work hard” for something to get it. That belief is nothing but a thought in the collective unconscious that we all need to get rid of.
Anyone who doesn’t understand that the Law of Attraction affects both ourselves as well as physical matter, is really missing the point of it all. Though energy is REAL! Nicola Tesla realized this, Jesus the Christ realized this and many others did and do realized this. You say you are open to finding out more, but are you really?
I actually am proud of many of the Secret teachers who risked getting called “quacks” for coming out and telling the public what many if not most of the great people in history stumbled upon but chose not to tell other people about for fear of being call crazy.
I do believe in dematerialization too. The great book says “ALL THINGS ARE POSSIBLE IF YOU BELIEVE” either this is true all false. Can I do it? No. But that’s just because of the deeply established beliefs in my mind. If the beliefs change, they can happen.
I’m disappointed that you seem to be trying to limit what people believe in.
If you were being consistent with your contentions what you would do is ask those people who believe in “magical thinking” whether or not this belief served them well. If it did (and considering that it flies in the face of what the collective unconscious and standard modern beliefs contend)….you should instruct them to impress that notion upon their subconscious mind and upon doing so, see what results materialize in their lives based on their new beliefs.
I wish people would stop emphasizing the role of physical work when it comes to “getting what you want”. As Neville Goddard once said “more wrong has come to this Earth by way of wrong thinking than ever did come by wrong doing”. If we getting the thinking part “right” the physical part will at least be effortless and and most will be a Labor of love.
If we humans spent as much time working on our minds and brains as we do “working hard” we would be so much further along. Yes there is “hard” work but that’s largely the case because for so long we have been programmed to believe that anything worth getting is hard to achieve.
These comments may not get published, but I hope they do. I hope whoever reads this and has “magical thinking” realizes that a Law is timeless and changes and that just because YOU may not believe something doesn’t mean it isn’t true.
Happy Journeying,
SIA
Jessie
Have enjoyed your site very much and benefited from the information. Thank You.
Hi Bill,
I love to hear other perspectives / ideologies about Manifesting. While I agree, there are many ways that things manifest for us (i like your wanting lemonade reference), I also know, from personal experience, I’ve drawn to me, resources, that I didn’t know existed — seemingly ‘magically’.
I believe, by my studies in the sciences, that energy is a very tangible and real thing, that can be measured – though not always seen. If we put out as it were, positive, grateful, loving energy, we draw people, and experiences that give us the opportunity to receive more of these things. Now, if we want to actually GET these things, we need to get off our duff and ‘act’. However, I’ve drawn many opportunities, by simply putting out my desires, and allowing the opportunity to come to me, however that way may be. In each instance, I’ve at that point, had to do something to complete the manifesting cycle, or attain the tangible thing I want — but I’ve never really had to do anything to manifest the OPPORTUNITY.
I do find your thoughts, and explanations very interesting however. I personally believe there is a balance between the ‘magical’ aspect, and the physical aspect, of manifesting. And let us not forget, being appreciative of what you do have, always lends strong energy to keeping attracting those things.
http://www.uncommon-knowledge.co.uk/articles/superstition-kills.html
The above is a cool article about how magical thinking in the form of superstition causes magical believers trouble. I think you might find it interesting Bill and everyone reading this.
Warm regards,
Dave :O)