tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post8824581983806374885..comments2024-03-19T18:44:15.041+08:00Comments on Little Stories: Thoughts Affect Reality. Let's Imagine MusclesGilbert Koh aka Mr Wanghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01027678080233274309noreply@blogger.comBlogger61125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-76787528247049256962007-07-25T18:18:00.000+08:002007-07-25T18:18:00.000+08:00>>Scientists have come up with just about the best...>>Scientists have come up with just about the best news that a couch potato could ever want to hear.<BR/><BR/>>>They say you can increase the strength of your muscles just by sitting back and imagine yourself taking exercise<BR/><BR/>Those scientists are a bit late in the day. The kungfu masters of China already knew about this long ago: practising kungfu with their thoughts as the acme of kungfu mastery.<BR/><BR/>There is in fact a video at YouTube which shows how just by imagining chi moving to your palm it literally expands in size within a few minutes. Anyone can test it out.<BR/><BR/>Skeptics, search around in YouTube and you will find it.<BR/><BR/>Take also the art of moving chi in what is called the microcosmic circulation along the spine. A master can literally transform his body into a youthful one looking at least 10 years younger and get rid of even obesity.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-425472949115611632007-07-03T14:47:00.000+08:002007-07-03T14:47:00.000+08:00I think that this statement:"Thought affects reali...I think that this statement:<BR/><BR/>"Thought affects reality"<BR/><BR/>has scientific backing, yes. The question is only to what extent, what kind of backing etc etc.<BR/><BR/>For example, we have that study where hypnosis made flesh wounds and broken bones heal faster.<BR/><BR/>We have statements from prominent scientists like this:<BR/><BR/>"The doctrine that the world is made up of objects whose existence is independent of human consciousness turns out to be in conflict with Quantum Mechanics and with facts established by experiment.""<BR/><BR/>We have that experiment which shows that mere thinking (imagining that you're working out) leads to gains in muscular strength.<BR/><BR/>And there are many, many others.<BR/>Etc etc. <BR/><BR/>Certainly there may be disagreements between scientists on these various experiments. Similarly scientists also have their controversies over the consumption of Vitamin C.<BR/><BR/>But certainly it would be false that there is NO scientific backing for the statement that "thought affects reality".Gilbert Koh aka Mr Wanghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01027678080233274309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-56869623528353349242007-07-03T14:39:00.000+08:002007-07-03T14:39:00.000+08:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.PZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08170446138335260523noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-78768988814889136912007-07-03T14:33:00.000+08:002007-07-03T14:33:00.000+08:00By the way, in my opinion, it is ENTIRELY possible...By the way, in my opinion, it is ENTIRELY possible to achieve clear, definite results WITHOUT <BR/><BR/>even understanding ANYTHING very much about hypnosis, meditation, quantum physics etc.<BR/><BR/>For example, the teachers in the Rosenthal experiment were never told anything about "mindhacking", or "thoughts affect reality" or whatever.<BR/> <BR/>In fact all they were told was an outright lie.<BR/><BR/>Yet the kids they falsely believed to be "smart" were transformed into smart kids, <BR/><BR/>and the kids they falsely believed to be "not smart" were transformed into "not-smart" kids -<BR/><BR/>all this despite the fact that the teachers never set out to make any particular kid "smart" or "not-smart".Gilbert Koh aka Mr Wanghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01027678080233274309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-23388739422013612102007-07-03T14:29:00.000+08:002007-07-03T14:29:00.000+08:00You still do not understand.The theory is "thought...You still do not understand.<BR/><BR/>The theory is "thought affects reality".<BR/><BR/>Science is also part of reality, you know.<BR/><BR/>"reality refuses to be divided up into neat slices according to our academic classifications. <BR/><BR/>Reality is not "Buddhism". Reality is not "quantum physics". Reality is not "financial markets" and reality is not "rats" or "children". <BR/><BR/>Reality is just reality. And thoughts affect reality - all of it. Whatever you think about.<BR/><BR/>And that is why you can look into ANY area of reality, including such diverse areas as Buddhism, quantum physics, finance, psychology etc, and still find evidence of the same "thoughts affect reality" phenomenon at work."Gilbert Koh aka Mr Wanghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01027678080233274309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-59012935553207652602007-07-03T14:27:00.000+08:002007-07-03T14:27:00.000+08:00PZ:Why are you so afraid? Yes, it is your subjecti...PZ:<BR/><BR/>Why are you so afraid? Yes, it is your subjective experience. So if you choose to participate, it is entirely up to you to conclude whether your experiment yielded any results or not, and if so, how they should be interpreted.<BR/><BR/>If you like, you need not even post the results on a blog. You could simply record them in a private notebook that no one else will see.Gilbert Koh aka Mr Wanghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01027678080233274309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-71365890042130788932007-07-03T14:21:00.000+08:002007-07-03T14:21:00.000+08:00*buddha* Wang wrote:"Like Buddha, I invite you to ...*buddha* Wang wrote:<BR/><BR/>"Like Buddha, I invite you to test the theory against your own experience."<BR/><BR/>Yes, a *spiritual* claim to test *my* subjective experience. <BR/><BR/>But you slipped in NEW claims of *scientific* proof using QM, Jahn, Wolf etc remember?????? Was this just a sleight of hand? Misdirection? Hmmm.<BR/><BR/>If you had stuck to this *spiritual* approach and had not introduced science, we wouldnt be having this discussion.<BR/><BR/>Any body else having a headache with these slippery equivocations? <BR/><BR/>PZPZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08170446138335260523noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-51376987275096421692007-07-03T14:07:00.000+08:002007-07-03T14:07:00.000+08:00"So, ultimately we have to take *your* belief on f...<B>"So, ultimately we have to take *your* belief on faith."</B><BR/><BR/>Ah, no you need not. You may read again my comment on June 27, 2007 at 2:29 pm over at this earlier <A HREF="http://mrwangsaysso.blogspot.com/2007/06/thoughts-and-reality-of-pets-children.html" REL="nofollow">post</A>.<BR/><BR/>Like Buddha, I invite you to test the theory against your own experience. I had written:<BR/><BR/><B>"Mr Wang will blog more and more in future, explaining different aspects of how "thoughts affect reality".<BR/><BR/>When I feel that I have blogged enough about this idea, and have clarified sufficiently how all of this works,<BR/><BR/>then I will invite all interested readers to participate in an experiment; <BR/><BR/>over the period of, say, one month;<BR/><BR/>during which they will periodically blog their progress and results on their own blogs,<BR/><BR/>I will guide them on the experimental methodology;<BR/><BR/>and then they can judge for themselves whether Mr Wang is right or not.<BR/><BR/>But first, you must understand what Mr Wang is talking about (whether you believe in it or not). Hence Mr Wang needs to blog more first.<BR/><BR/>In fact, whether Mr Wang is right or not is not the point. The point is whether you will acquire invaluable, practical insights to shape and influence your own reality the way you want it.<BR/><BR/>The experiment will cost you no money; require you to do nothing hazardous to your health; or anything embarassing in public; and it will take only about 10 to 15 minutes of your time every day, or a total of 7.5 hours in a month. And one way or the other, the only person you need to convince is yourself - it is after all your own reality. And if you feel that there are gaps in my proposed methodology, it is entirely possible for you to change the methodology for your own little experiment and faithfully record the changes on your own blog. <BR/><BR/>So the greatest possible loss to you is only 7.5 hours; the greatest possible gain is very, very great indeed - is there any possible logical reason why you would not participate?"</B>Gilbert Koh aka Mr Wanghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01027678080233274309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-69316089473840060212007-07-03T13:43:00.000+08:002007-07-03T13:43:00.000+08:00Mr.Wang wrote:"If it makes you feel any better, yo...Mr.Wang wrote:<BR/><BR/>"If it makes you feel any better, you're welcome to think of my theory as "non-scientific" in nature."<BR/><BR/>Thank you but this has nothing to do with my *feelings*. That would be an honest statement and merely stating the truth.<BR/><BR/>"In the end, people will just have to find some way to personally convince themselves one way or the other."<BR/><BR/>So, ultimately we have to take *your* belief on faith.<BR/><BR/>If you had stated at the very outset that Mindhacking is merely your religion, we could haved saved ourselves a lot of time and grief.<BR/><BR/>Thank you for finally admitting that, even if it did take a long time coming.<BR/><BR/>PZPZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08170446138335260523noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-17409001112843942322007-07-03T13:04:00.000+08:002007-07-03T13:04:00.000+08:00i guess we all owe senor wang some leeway. i conce...i guess we all owe senor wang some leeway. i concede that he may have something interesting lined up.<BR/><BR/>but my patience is limited. hell, i didn't even have enough to finish the wisdom in "don quixote". <BR/><BR/>even rocinante won't go on forever.hunguptodryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12370398036117346396noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-51383861891427824302007-07-03T12:51:00.000+08:002007-07-03T12:51:00.000+08:00Sorry last paragraph should have read as follows.I...Sorry last paragraph should have read as follows.<BR/><BR/>It is you who are forwarding *your* theory. All we are asking is - i. e. the saner sceptics, not the naive all believing morons who buy the DVDs and books of charlatans because another new-age quack comes along and says he knows a method using QM derived techniques that will take you to meet Jesus behind the Planet Uranus - where is the beef?PZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08170446138335260523noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-22794197021095144852007-07-03T12:47:00.000+08:002007-07-03T12:47:00.000+08:00Mr. Wang wrote in part:"The difficulty I see is th...Mr. Wang wrote in part:<BR/><BR/>"The difficulty I see is that none of my experiments will, in any case, convince anyone who is determined to disbelieve."<BR/><BR/>Wrong. Straw-man sceptic again. You have a very short memory. <BR/><BR/>All we ask is proof, you know, the good ol' scientific way as opposed to pseudo-science nonsense. <BR/><BR/>"In the end, people will just have to find some way to personally convince themselves one way or the other."<BR/><BR/>No one has to convince himself to anything. That would be self-delusion. <BR/><BR/>It is you who are forwarding *your* theory. All we are asking, i. e. the saner sceptics, not the naive all believing morons who buy the DVDs and books of charlatans because another new-age quack comes along and says he knows a method using QM derived techniques that will take you to meet Jesus behind the Planet Uranus.<BR/><BR/>PZPZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08170446138335260523noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-18633228441990753372007-07-03T12:26:00.000+08:002007-07-03T12:26:00.000+08:00"QM explains it all!"No of course not. It explains...<B>"QM explains it all!"</B><BR/><BR/>No of course not. It explains only a part of it.Gilbert Koh aka Mr Wanghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01027678080233274309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-16906324323362545992007-07-03T12:24:00.000+08:002007-07-03T12:24:00.000+08:00"the only problem is we have not understood it one...<B>"the only problem is we have not understood it one bit more."</B> <BR/><BR/>I could say a lot more. And I will.<BR/><BR/>But I have to lay the groundwork first. You may not have noticed, but I have been laying the groundwork since late May.<BR/><BR/>Look back over my old posts, and I think you may begin to see. See these posts for instance - <A HREF="http://mrwangsaysso.blogspot.com/2007/05/this-evening-in-mr-wangs-life.html" REL="nofollow">1</A>, <A HREF="http://mrwangsaysso.blogspot.com/2007/05/how-to-achieve-greater-success-than-you.html" REL="nofollow">2</A>, <A HREF="http://mrwangsaysso.blogspot.com/2007/06/can-success-be-easy.html" REL="nofollow">3</A>, <A HREF="http://mrwangsaysso.blogspot.com/2007/06/how-to-touch-face-of-god.html" REL="nofollow">4</A> - I have been slowly, slowly preparing you readers.<BR/><BR/>I do not wish to move any faster than I have been moving. As you can see, even at my current pace, many readers are already screaming and protesting in pain at the rate at which I drag them up the learning curve. Even my earlier posts, "mild" as they were (compared to my latest ones), encountered fierce disagreement from some readers.<BR/><BR/>Currently I've barely even scratched the surface of this topic - which literally encompasses <I>the whole of reality.</I><BR/><BR/>Meanwhile I have been steadily recording my personal experiments in writing all along (I still do, and I'm quite meticulous and detailed about this). I've been doing that for quite some time now; some experiments are quirky and fun; some are quite serious. <BR/><BR/>Among other things, along the way I've become one of Singapore's top income earners my age. Also, by applying some big twists to the Rosenthal effect, I've managed to raise two extremely gifted kids (whose teachers keep insisting that I must move them up to classes meant for older kids; and send them for psychological testing etc etc). One kindergarten principal even angrily accused me of parental negligence for refusing to acknowledge and nurture the unusual giftedness of my older kid - as if I didn't already know that he is unusually gifted.<BR/><BR/>I may blog more about my numerous personal experiments, or I may not. The difficulty I see is that none of my experiments will, in any case, convince anyone who is determined to disbelieve. <BR/><BR/>For example my career success, mo matter how outstanding, could always be attributed to luck or market forces or personal attributes such as diligence or intelligence. Or one might say that my kids are very smart because they are born very smart, it has nothing to do with my homegrown Rosenthal experiments. <BR/><BR/>In the end, people will just have to find some way to personally convince themselves one way or the other. <BR/><BR/>In fact, as I have previously mentioned, this is a key feature in various "thought affects reality" theories. I cannot consciously create in another person's reality; a person's reality always depends on his own thoughts; and fundamentally each of us has the unassailable freedom to choose our own thoughts. It's what the Christians call "free will" - even the devil cannot take your soul unless you give him permission etc etc. In Buddhism, we would say that karma is always personal; you cannot, for instance, inherit the sins of your father, or be saved from a bad fate just because your mother was a very good person etc. What you think affects YOUR own reality.Gilbert Koh aka Mr Wanghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01027678080233274309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-85207842660806744122007-07-03T11:41:00.000+08:002007-07-03T11:41:00.000+08:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.PZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08170446138335260523noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-80612520904527570852007-07-03T11:09:00.000+08:002007-07-03T11:09:00.000+08:00There is no sunshine, curry, coffee, underwear etc...There is no sunshine, curry, coffee, underwear etc, if there is no consciousness.<BR/><BR/>and presumably consciousness is everything.<BR/><BR/>so you're saying everything affects everything else.<BR/><BR/>thats not saying very much.<BR/><BR/>now to summarize ....<BR/>1) u think about something. <BR/>2) this sets off a chain reaction.<BR/>3) which inevitably affects a host of other things.<BR/><BR/>now, that seems to sum up the workings of our universe.<BR/><BR/>the only problem is we have not understood it one bit more.hunguptodryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12370398036117346396noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-28641915482101439612007-07-03T11:05:00.000+08:002007-07-03T11:05:00.000+08:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.BTHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12875442065638846069noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-29192764492291016592007-07-03T10:40:00.000+08:002007-07-03T10:40:00.000+08:00"You should not be invoking QM to try to prove you...<B>"You should not be invoking QM to try to prove your theories.</B><BR/><BR/>If it makes you feel any better, you're welcome to think of my theory as "non-scientific" in nature.<BR/><BR/>As I've mentioned, the theory, whether correct or not, simply cannot be solely examined from a purely scientific perspective. <BR/><BR/>It cannot be examined from any <I>single</I> perspective.<BR/><BR/>The idea that "thought affects reality" has implications for every aspect of reality, including areas which the hard sciences cannot or has not ventured into; and including areas that do not fit into Karl Popper's set of rules about what constitutes the "scientific method". <BR/><BR/>This is essentially the same point as I made in the post - the point is that we could look into diverse areas such as quantum physics, financial markets, psychology, religion (and many more, which I haven't touched upon yet), and still find evidence of this theory at work. <BR/><BR/>Reality refuses to be divided up into neat slices according to our academic classifications. <BR/><BR/>So while science can shed some light on some aspects of this theory, clearly science cannot shed light on all aspects of this theory; <BR/><BR/>no single discipline can.<BR/><BR/>You have to understand that science can say what science can say, and what it says can be very, very important, <BR/><BR/>but there are many, many things that science cannot say, one way or the other.<BR/><BR/>"<B>Remember the Principle of Falsifiability in REAL Scientifc methodolgy?"</B><BR/><BR/>Examples - all of the following statements could, depending on the context, be very important, but none of them are falsifiable in real scientific methodology. It is EXTREMEY unscientific to assert:<BR/><BR/>1. Your mother hates you<BR/><BR/>2. Your father loves you<BR/><BR/>3. Love exists<BR/><BR/>4. Hate exists<BR/><BR/>5. Lee Kuan Yew is a capable leader and Singapore owes much of its success to him.<BR/><BR/>6. Global stock markets are likely to experience strong volatility in the next six months.<BR/><BR/>7. Hard work and interpersonal skills are the two most essential elements for career success.<BR/><BR/>8. I am happier than you are.<BR/><BR/>9. It is important for a musician to have a good sense of pitch and a strong sense of rhythm. Furthermore he must have a strong "feel" for music.<BR/><BR/>10. Gods do not exist.<BR/><BR/>11. Supply and demand in the economy have a distinct relationship.<BR/><BR/>12. If you carry a young baby a lot, he will feel more secure and loved.<BR/><BR/>12. Homosexuality is immoral.<BR/><BR/>13. Successful entrepreneurs are risk takers.<BR/><BR/>14. SMU is a better university than NUS.<BR/><BR/>15. Some people are natural leaders.<BR/><BR/>16. Mother Teresa was a very kind person, and she helped to ease the suffering of many poor people. She was an inspiration to many volunteer workers around the world.<BR/><BR/>.... whether you agree or disagree with any of the above statements, none can be scientifically tested. It does not follow that all of them are false; AND it does not follow that none of them are significant; <BR/><BR/>AND it does not follow that none of them can be proved or tested.<BR/><BR/>They just cannot be proven or tested by science. That is all.Gilbert Koh aka Mr Wanghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01027678080233274309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-41367479330978117712007-07-03T09:41:00.000+08:002007-07-03T09:41:00.000+08:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-49242681652882239382007-07-03T08:27:00.000+08:002007-07-03T08:27:00.000+08:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.BTHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12875442065638846069noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-15033392144467244542007-07-03T03:33:00.000+08:002007-07-03T03:33:00.000+08:00I'm not sure whether this promotion applies for th...I'm not sure whether this promotion applies for those outside U.S.<BR/><BR/>BUT for readers in U.S., Barnes and Noble is selling Stephen Hawking's The Illustrated A Brief History of Time <B>AND</B> The Universe in a Nutshell for US$10 (Each of these books usually retails for a lot more). <A HREF="http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?r=1&EAN=9780307291226&z=y&itm=5" REL="nofollow">Link</A><BR/><BR/>Seems like a good reference for laymen (me!) who want to understand what Mr Wang has been saying.Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01368232348867258776noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-20614895621158110692007-07-03T03:23:00.000+08:002007-07-03T03:23:00.000+08:00bth wrote "Err Think? Remember that to assume anyt...bth wrote <B>"<I>Err Think</I>? Remember that to assume anything and jumping to conclusions without checking the facts is the mother of fuck-ups?"</B><BR/><BR/><BR/>To "think" is to "ponder, reflect on, and reason about".<BR/><BR/>You appeared to be confused with the word "guess" (which is to express a belief with incomplete evidence).Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01368232348867258776noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-38165318114441743962007-07-03T03:17:00.000+08:002007-07-03T03:17:00.000+08:00hunguptodry said "like what? i can't THINK of any....hunguptodry said <B>"like what? i can't THINK of any."</B><BR/><BR/>well, if <B>I</B> had not thought about the color of your underwear, then whatever is the color of <B>your</B> underwear will NOT affect <B>MY</B> reality.<BR/><BR/>However, once <B>I</B> start thinking about it, <B>my</B> reality is affected.Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01368232348867258776noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-91086505755592459322007-07-02T19:35:00.000+08:002007-07-02T19:35:00.000+08:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.BTHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12875442065638846069noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4405345292513335071.post-49839680227377964122007-07-02T19:26:00.000+08:002007-07-02T19:26:00.000+08:00Jon said:"I think "The Secret" movie is similar to...Jon said:<BR/><BR/>"I think "The Secret" movie is similar to the Christian Bible, or the Buddhist Sutra, in the sense that many viewers don't take it 100% literally."<BR/><BR/>Err Think? Remember that to assume anything and jumping to conclusions without checking the facts is the mother of fuck-ups? <BR/><BR/>Watch the movie and then come back and report that it is similar to the Bible or Buddhist Sutra.<BR/><BR/>Do let me know what the movie is really saying and exactly what is the LOA?BTHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12875442065638846069noreply@blogger.com