I was delighted to stumble across the Intention-Manifestation Theory of reality a few months ago. As I understood this theory, the key to achieving success in the spheres of business, dating and health is to intend it.
Fortune smiled upon me that day. Intention-Manifestation Theory seemed the greatest labor-saving discovery since the cotton gin, and I was sorely in need of its utility. Since starting my website last year, I had been overwhelmed by article ideas, but never had enough time to fully develop, transcribe and publish them.
I decided to employ the theory straight away. During my daytime coffee break, I intended some great blog posts about the meaning of life and martial arts. I intended them with great enthusiasm, as long and as hard as circumstances would allow. Excited over my accomplishment, I eagerly awaited the end of the workday.
When I arrived home in the evening and checked my Wordpress control panel, delight gave way to confusion. All my brilliant articles were missing! The website looked just as it had the day before—almost as if I had intended nothing at all. And yet, I distinctly remembered having the intentions.
I felt betrayed by the promise of The Secret, but before cursing its foul and demonic origins, I searched for a reasonable explanation. After what seemed like an eternity of darkworking introspection—five minutes, perhaps more—I found what I was looking for. Earlier that day, I had been working on a CRUD software application: I must have accidentally intended to delete my blog articles, after intending to write them!
The next day, I was far more careful. I re-intended writing the posts (harder than it sounds!), and nothing else. When co-workers asked me technical questions, I just ignored them. Actually, I pitied them, with their so-called “science”, and “logic”; I didn’t have room for all that negativity within my subjective reality.
Despite this caution, the results of my intentions were the same as last time: no new articles appeared. Frustrated by these unacceptable results, my penchant for empiricism took control, and I began to develop an alternative theorem.
Step 1: Intention
Step 2: POOF! Action
Step 3: Manifestation
Diagram A: Proposed Revision to Intention-Manifestation Theory
Action-Manifestation Theory
An intermediate step between Intention and Manifestation appears necessary to generate positive results. I have taken to calling this step “Action”. My limited experiments suggest that it is Action—and not daydreaming—which produces these results. More research is needed on this perplexing topic.
Loading ...
15 responses so far ↓
1 Gaz // Jun 24, 2007
ROFL!
Ah, thank you so very much for taking all the puff and bluster out of this whole “Secret”. I’ve been brewing a post of my own to try to poke a few holes in it… but I couldn’t hold a candle to this. Nice work
2 Fat-Cuum Cleaner® // Jun 28, 2007
I intended to write this comment without typing.
I did.
I intended to get over 400,000 blog subscribers without work.
I did.
I intend to become more famous onscreen than Tom Cruise, while never actually acting or doing a shred of work.
I will.
Behold…the power of intention!
(I love this post)
3 II-Tone Chaos // Jun 28, 2007
I’m sensing some sarcasm milling around this post somewhere. No small amount of it, either. It’s almost as though it’s been somehow infused directly within the content (as in, having been “intended” by the author…i.e., consciously, specifically made adjunct to the provided commentary by such author–and almost assuredly of his/her own cognizant volition!)
But how could that be? The proof is actually right there in the pudding. Literally (well, it would be if the matter in question was actually a mass of pudding rather than a volume of sage offering for the woe-bestricken masses of the mighty convention…). What I mean is that you folks seem oblivious to the mass growth of evergreens on account of its being obscured by all those damned annoying conifers.
I see it just fine, so if I may, please allow me to draw the lines of clear arboreal distinction…the theoretical system/method in question has to work. It simply HAS to. Look no further than the author of this wizened and utterly indispensable theory for your proof. She desired as hard as she could to acquire fame and fortune, and let me just say that it must have been some hard-core, uber earnest desiring that she did, because suddenly *poof* it’s all come about and I myself see not a single, solitary, microscopic shred of evidence of even the slightest effort applied, intelligence called upon, or action engaged in. There you have it, folks. A nice, neat, infinitely tail-chasing snowball of circular reasoning that takes the liberty of proving itself by its very manifestation and indeed still does so even as I type by its continued existence. How can anyone possibly hope to touch that? It’s just like the very concept of belief/faith which, as it’s been said, may indeed make for a lousy sword, but as armor, it leaves bulletproof in the dust and eats nuclear bombardment for brunch with tea and crumpets on the veranda.
Oh, and psst! The SECRET is this: in this silly, much-too-stupid-to-die world of ours, not only are there lots of both idiots and people sick of having to constantly get new pants that don’t have scorched pockets from all that pesky cash, but it turns out that there is a significant amount of overlap between those two circles. Pass it on!
4 Denise Jones // Sep 25, 2007
Why doesn’t II tone chaos, (who apparently likes his thesaurus ), read a quantum physics book instead. Find out a little bit about energy, atoms, and subatomatic particles and you might uncover a bit of truth in “the secret” It is a book written in layman’s terms so that the average person can understand it. Perhaps II tone chaos is too intelligent to understand the simplified version.
There IS hardcore evidence in the world of physics. Psst, you need a microscope to see it.
5 Chris // Sep 25, 2007
Denise, why don’t you share your hardcore evidence here so everyone can benefit?
6 duochrome complexity // Sep 25, 2007
2-tone chaos LOVES his thesaurus, thank you very much…so much so, in fact, that we’re planning a lovely spring wedding (to which you, madam, may not be expecting an invitation–hmmphff!).
I’m not really certain precisely how to go about this because you’ve made concrete assertions in a manner that would seem to suggest my comment makes explicit claims or, indeed anything more than a [potentially quite misleading] general, abstract tone of facetiousness (throughout most of it, that is), which is not, in fact the case. Let me clarify my position so that you might, given the benefit of a more concrete base on which to build, construct a more structurally-sound case against me…
I was only being partially sarcastic/ironic because, to a certain extent, I do agree with the theory. But my cynical side absolutely adores the irony inherent in not only its lack of completeness, but also the fact that the lazy, inept, etc. people who make up the majority of the audience of such offerings lack precisely the thing necessary to take the concept, complete the thought, and in so doing, actually manifest any real change. This fact is made apparent by their hopeful reliance on schemes to “get rich quick” or any such method offering any easy or effortless fulfillment of their desires. I’m a firm believer in “the power of positive thinking”, particularly because, having acquired our mysterious consciousness with all its inherent abilities of perception, etc., we are potentially both the masters of destiny and bringers of doom, depending on our perception of our circumstances. (On a side note, there is an ancient Mayan school of philosophy which believes that, when viewed from the perspective of a plane existing somehow beyond our own physical world of 3–technically, 4…in theory–dimensions, physical matter clearly consists of densely-tangled masses of interwoven bands of energy. Their name for this energy–translated as closely as can be achieved, given the obvious gaps between very different cultures existing at far different times–is Intent. In certain context(s), this concept is astounding and thought-provoking to me both for its simplicity and the vastness of some of its implications, philosophically…)
As to quantum physics, I must say I’m a bit lost as to your specific intentions in bringing it up as I’m personally unaware of any findings or principles which might be found in a book on the subject bringing anything at all to bear on this discussion. The fact that you fail to specify the pertinence of such a reference does nothing to clarify the matter for me. Please feel free to assist me in making the connection–not only do I love to learn, but I furthermore pride myself on my willingness to abandon an argument and concede once clearly shown to be in error…seriously! And please forgive my ignorance on the subject. I tried once to study quantum physics, but my gluons were unruly and recalcitrant and the subsequent melee of wildly varying energy levels caused my quarks to do any number of things other than the preferred act of simply staying together. I fought and wrestled with them for a while, but was forced to abandon the effort upon the tragic death/not death of my beloved pet cat. It hit me a bit harder than it probably would have if I were at least certain of its fate…but then the experiment would be ruined now, wouldn’t it?
P.S.sst! I assume that if I’m going to be seeing anything at all in the realm scrutinized by quantum physics, I’ll probably need a little bit more than just a microscope!
7 Denise Jones // Sep 26, 2007
Gees Duochrome Complexity… you really are freaking intelligent! Thank god for that. I mentioned quantum physics simply to link “intention” to “manifestation”. And…. my humble friend, I reckon you know a littttle bit more than you’re letting on. I bought it up, because energy and matter (at the quark level), can be both neither and the same simultaneously, until intent and observation have come into play.
You made me laugh (with you, not at you). You are right, the microscope comment was ridiculous, however I really did think you were using a thesaurus. Okay, joke’s on me, you actually do talk like that. I just got p@#ssed off cause you seemed to think (perhaps you are?) above the rest of us “idiots” out there.
The “secret” is more than positive thinking, however although it seems like the answer to all our prayers, you and I know, most will never manifest anything new. It’s a step in the right direction though. No need to put people down aye.
8 Chris // Sep 26, 2007
Actually, The Secret is a step in the wrong direction, and if I haven’t made that clear enough in my past articles, I’ll be happy to write another.
9 Greg // Apr 15, 2008
Oh, this is just hilarious. RSS!
the skwib » The Carnival of Satire (#77) // Jun 28, 2007
[…] Chris has been reading The Secret, and has run an Experiment with Intention-Manifestation Theory. […]
Bryan C. Fleming » Personal Growth Carnival #45 // Jun 29, 2007
[…] third choice is a short article by Tim Kainu. He talks about Work, Stress, and Attitude. It’s a quick read reminding us that we choose our attitude (and our stress level). Hmm… […]
Meditation, Yoga & Spiritual Growth Carnival - July 1, 2007 » Mastery of Meditation, Enlightenment & Kundalini Yoga » Blog Archive // Jul 1, 2007
[…] presents My Experiment with Intention-Manifestation Theory posted at Martial […]
Yoga News | Yoga Video » Blog Archive » Meditation, Yoga & Spiritual Growth Carnival - July 1, 2007 // Jul 19, 2007
[…] presents My Experiment with Intention-Manifestation Theory posted at Martial […]
Think, Grow Rich, or Die Trying: The Bruce Lee Story // Aug 4, 2007
[…] than Bruce Lee himself did. Ironic? I can only suggest that fans of the Law of Attraction and Intention-Manifestation Theory learn from Lee’s example, and choose their goals carefully. There are two tragedies in life. One […]
The Nondual Perspective on Subjective Reality // Dec 24, 2007
[…] Subjective Reality and the Law of Attraction are mere foreplay for the Law of Action. Technorati Tags: subjective reality, advaita, law of attraction, intention-manifestation, […]
Leave a Comment