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.
Receive free updates by email or RSS
32 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!
10
kads chowdhury
// Jun 18, 2008
intention is only one aspect of manifestation like you said, and so is action like you said.
however, energy is also required.
so the system for manifestation is a system of energy-intent-action .
Learn the full system at my website which is http://www.manifestationintelligence.com
11
moserw
// Aug 5, 2008
Very funny and humorous. I am still smiling going over it in my mind.
12
Amy
// Sep 15, 2008
For the record, this is NOT how intention manifestation works, and I don’t think it’s really fair to claim that anyone who pushes the concept suggests that you merely have to think and *poof*! what you desire will appear.
Now, “The Secret” and other believers in the Law of Attraction/intention-manifestation DO claim that if you envision inspired, well-written articles, and enthusiastically believe that you have written them, that you will. In other words, let’s say that you’re having difficulties coming up with a topic, that you’re dealing with a serious case of writer’s block. The LoA says that if you apply the techniques, the universe will align to make your desire manifest in various ways. NOT that your articles will write themselves and magically appear on your blog, but that something may happen to inspire you. You may receive an email from a reader asking a question that inspires a topic you haven’t written about before, for example.
I will grant that The Secret takes the idea into wild directions, but the Law of Attraction is based in sound logic. There is considerable evidence now that a person’s feelings are created by their thoughts: i.e. if you think you are a bad person, you will feel like a bad person. Cognitive therapy is a technique applied to individuals suffering from extremely low self-esteem or even depression, on the theory that if you tell yourself you have confidence, you will feel confident. Again, this is a sound theory with considerable evidence to back it up. As we think, so we feel. The law of attraction, or intention-manifestation model, is merely this same principle taken to extremes. It does NOT say that if you wish very hard for a Lexus convertible, that one will appear out of thin air into your drive way, but that if you set your intention before the Universe, the latter will realign reality to match your desire. A possible scenario would be that after you set your intention, you hear a co-worker mention that a relative of theirs is trying to sell their car, which turns out to be that Lexux convertible you wanted. Or you check the want ads and find that someone is advertising that very car.
13
Karate_and_Taiji_student
// Sep 15, 2008
@Amy: In “The Secret” the picture conveyed is quite different from what you write. The premise of “The Secret” is testable and this is what this blog entry is about. The result is clear.
Now, you come up with a different “Law of Attraction”, a different theory for how things should work that is just less testable. You can just call mere coincidences evidence and attribute those cases where it fails to your own failure to notice.
There is nothing to be gained out of this. Setting a goal, taking action and being persistent is a proven concept that brings success in many if not most cases. If you relabel this to be the Law of Attraction, then, yes, it exists and it works.
However, most people – including yourself – don’t call the “set goal&take action” approach the Law of Attraction. They employ some metaphysical concept which you have described pretty well. If this concept exists and is not just a trivial relabelling it must work without taking action. Maybe less well than with action included, but it must work.
And it must also be able to manifest things out of thin air. Maybe not a car on the first try, but there must be a measurable correlation between desire and result without taking action.
It should be obvious that nothing like this exists or at least that it is so much weaker than the results that action bring that it is absolutely irrelevant.
14
Chris
// Sep 15, 2008
Amy, I mostly agree with Karate_and_Taiji_student. To the average martial artist, the Law of Attraction and Intention-Manifestation Theory are absurd–not because intentions are unimportant, but because they are plainly insufficient.
I might have listed more serious and formal objections to The Secret, but as Li Tai-Liang put it to me: “Why use a cannon to shoot down a sparrow?”
15
Human To God
// Oct 28, 2008
Intention-Manifestation is a probable theory.
Just not with any people living here on earth.
The books that speak about it are using the principle of positive thinking and goal orientation.
Simple enough, yet a lot of people cannot overcome their environment enough to even it into practice.
So people decided to cash in on it because some of the masses are very quick to buy into the ‘get something for nothing’ idea.
If one could manifest things at wil, I wonder what kinds of changes would be wrought in the world?
If one person wished another dead, could they counteract it?
Ah, the possibilities.
16
Chris
// Oct 28, 2008
“More tears are shed over answered prayers than unanswered ones.”
~ St. Teresa of Avila (Spanish Nun, Mystic and Writer, 1515-1582)
17
Thunderbird
// Oct 28, 2008
everything that has ever been, is, or will be began with a thought. Think about that.
18
Human to God
// Oct 29, 2008
Chris, that might be because the prayer lacks the requisite details and is made in a moment of emotional desperation.
19
Chris
// Oct 29, 2008
H to G,
If you don’t see the relevance of St. Teresa’s words, you should study the example of Bruce Lee…a man who was unusually successful in “manifesting his intentions” and arguably killed himself in the process.
One might further argue that all fans of I-M theory are, by definition, operating from emotional desperation–the alternative being to accept things as they are, rather than intending them otherwise.
20
Human to God
// Oct 30, 2008
I am well aware of Bruce Lee.
And his death was not caused by his success but more his reaction to it and other environmental factors.
I-M theory is only based on emotional desperation when the person is not taking the required action to go towards their goal.
21
Thunderbird
// Oct 30, 2008
of course intention manifestation is real. Everything that has ever been came from that. Everything from your kitchen stove, cars, cell phones, to your girlfriend initially were created with a thought from someone.
22
Chris
// Oct 30, 2008
Another quote, this of unknown origin:
“While the common man fears the effect, the superior man fears the cause.”
My question is not whether it is real, but whether it is skillful, in the context for which it is typically recommended (i.e. getting more stuff).
23
Human to God
// Oct 31, 2008
Whether it is skillful or not depends on the individual. Using it to become financially successful is recommended because its an easy way for people to measure whether or not it works for them.
24
Thunderbird
// Oct 31, 2008
There is nothing wrong with abundance and Godmind is limitless. Our goal is to follow that road not create barriers and limits. If more money is something you want and will help you move to deeper levels it needs to be done. Its hard to focus on the Tao when your not sure where your next meal is coming from. If that new found money pulls someone from the path it isn’t the money’s fault. The person needs to take repsonsibility for being weak.
25
Mindless1
// Oct 31, 2008
Buddha gave up his wealth level of development he got. Jesus preached the same thing. If you have a wife or child to support then you cant get rid of money but if not then you have limitless freedom
26
Chris
// Oct 31, 2008
And if you can’t focus, then you surely have no use for Intention-Manifestation and the Law of Attraction.
To those unfortunate souls, I recommend dropping the New Age silliness and picking up a hearty ham sandwich….before it is too late!
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