Calling John Stossel
Given the intense interest in the film The Secret and the idea of the Law of Attraction (LOA), I think it would make a fantastic topic for an investigative report by ABC News Correspondent John Stossel.
Here are just a few of the many interesting questions he could investigate:
Is the LOA really a law that works *every* time as its promoters claim? Tests could be conducted and the results reported.
What is the general consensus of the scientific community regarding the LOA? Is it science or is it something else?
How might the notion that “we are responsible for everything that happens in our lives” (as taught in the LOA) affect people who are victims of such things as disease, depression, sexual assault, etc?
What are the academic credentials and professional qualifications of the proponents of the LOA who appear in The Secret?
In what fields other than self-help have these experts succeed by practicing the Law of Attraction? And, how does that level of success compare to the success they are having selling Law of Attraction related materials and seminars?
And finally…
What role do the ideas of “channeled spirits” play in the LOA as taught by The Secret?
Many in the mainstream media (e.g. Oprah, Larry King, etc.) are already promoting these ideas, but to the best of my knowledge no one has adequately investigated the claims being made, or the people making them.
It seems the time is right for a show like this and I think John Stossel is just the person to do it. And in order to help clear up the confusion surrounding these ideas I plan to do everything I can to help make this happen.
The people on both sides of this issue appear confident of their positions so I am certain I can count on the full support of everyone involved.
I’m currently contacting people in my network in an effort to get this idea to Mr. Stossel but I would welcome any additional help my readers could provide.
Thanks in advance for your support.
Posted on Saturday, February 24, 2007 at 10:55 AM
Share Blair:
(31) Reader Comments about Calling John Stossel
Cosmic Connie says...
Blair, some of us have been calling for a real journalistic examination of “The Secret” for months now. I even wrote to ABC.com last fall about it. But I think the time is ripe now. And I think Stossel is a great choice. Good luck!
~CCPosted on 02/24/2007 at 11:17 AM
Blair Warren says...
Thanks for the info and good wishes Connie.
If you know of any people/blogs/forums that might be able to make some headway please feel free to pass along my post in full.
I’ll keep you posted!
Posted on 02/24/2007 at 11:24 AM
Glennie says...
Blair,
I am all for your investigation into the techniques proposed by “The Secret”. However, nothing of what was said in The Secret was new information. I’m actually familiar with several fo the people in the film, and have worked for Neale Donald Walsch, the author of Conversations with God, and the person who started the worldwide organization, Humanity’s Team.
In regards to rape, disease, depression, and the like, even CWG (mentioned above) goes far deeper into understanding those facets of the human experience. The “Law” of Attraction is only part of it. “As a man thinketh, so shall he become” (Biblical quote claimed to be from Christ). Again, the Secret is not new or revolutionary information.
I understand the need to look into this. However, I question not the motives of those who are proponents of The Secret, but those so willing to undo it, on a whim.
If one goes in with the belief that it is a fraud, though it is not being sold as one, then all one will see IS a fraud. That is part of the “Law of Attraction.” “No object observed is uneffected by the observer.”
The “channeled spirits” ideas was not mentioned in the film, nor should it be used to misrepresent the information. As well, there is more to life than what appears in front of us.
So, explaining rape, disease, depression, goes deeper and further than what the film can cover, but Neale Donald Walsch does cover it in his books. The Conversations with God book series, for 12 years, now, has talked about practically the same thing that The Secret discusses. This is why I am not so overly suspicious.
However, I look forward to a balanced, positive investigation from John Stossel.
Posted on 02/24/2007 at 12:25 PM
Paul Wilson says...
Another person you may want to investigate this issue is James Randi.
He has a rich history of critically examining and reporting on various claims of controversial phenomena.
In my opinion an objective well-designed scientific study performed by a disinterested third-party might be useful in analyzing this issue.
Paul
Posted on 02/24/2007 at 12:35 PM
Hannah says...
Blair,
sometimes the old-fashioned way of contacting people is still effective. Sending a registered letter or package to Mr. Stossel may get your proposal in front of him. Their mailing address is:
ABCNews
7 WEST 66th Street
New York, NY 10023Hannah
Posted on 02/24/2007 at 12:55 PM
kevin hogan says...
the broken law
every law predicts a result. that’s why it’s a law....
two teams are ready to go play.
both teams have been instructed, believe and live in the law of attraction.
all players are believers.both want the win, the super bowl trophy. they’ve imagined it to be true. they’ve attracted it!
which team will get the trophy?
kevin
http://www.kevinhogan.comstossel will be easy to reach through the news website and he’ll certainly look at this. i’ll drop the note if you like.
kh
Posted on 02/24/2007 at 01:16 PM
kevin says...
. “As a man thinketh, so shall he become”
so the paralyzed children will walk this week?
thank god.
would you go tell them for us all....
kevin hogan
http://www.kevinhogan.comPosted on 02/24/2007 at 01:18 PM
Peter Blue says...
Dear Blair!
We have been experimenting with the ideas that are mentioned in the secret for quite a while, even before the movie was released.
We try to be playful with it. And it is fun, too. It has changed us, and the way we deal with life.
Regardless if the methods can be scientifically proven or not - spreading them to a greater audience could really make a change. The more people start taking responsibility for their lifes, the better it gets for all. Everybody appearing in the movie has his own reasons. They may be different. And it is not up to me to judge them. Could it be they all play a role in a game that’s bigger than their current understanding?
One more thing - in America there is a strong tradition of taking responsibility for oneself already. In Europe, in Germany, where I live, the secret and the message withing could be a cure for a mentality that is very demanding. People here have for generations relied upon the government and the social systems. Even worse in the former communist states.
Peter Blue
Posted on 02/24/2007 at 01:21 PM
Cosmic Connie says...
In regard to one of the comments made by Glennie, above: Channeled spirits may not be mentioned directly in the DVD of “The Secret,” but didn’t the original version feature Jerry and Esther Hicks, of Abraham-Hicks fame? (In fact, as I recall, many people were disappointed that they were deleted from the “new improved” version.)
And isn’t the Hicks’ book, “The Law of Attraction,” as well as most of their other works, based on information gained from “channeling” a group of entities collectively known as “Abraham?”
Further (since so many “Secret” fans are also fans of “What The Bleep Do We Know"), it could be argued that “What The Bleep” is a glorified infomercial for JZ Knight and her channeled pal Ramtha. In fact Larry King had JZ (and, presumably, Ramtha) as a guest on the first of his two “Positive Thinking” segments last November.
You may believe channeling is legit. You may believe it’s simply “bad ventriloquism” (as magician Penn Jillette said). Or you may just prefer to stay out of that conversation entirely. But I think that a *completely* honest look at “The Secret” will look at all of the material that inspired it—as well as the beliefs, spoken and unspoken, that sustain it.
Whether all of that is part of Stossel’s beat or not, it belongs in a comprehensive look at “The Secret” culture.
Posted on 02/24/2007 at 02:04 PM
Harvey says...
The “Law of Attraction” requires a very high level of acceptance for the responsibility we have in shaping our lives.
Science cannot prove or disprove the law of attraction because the “law of attraction” is a purely subjective state of consciousness.
These people arent selling crack cocaine so personally I dont care how much money they’ve made.
People whom state the law of attraction as a fact also seem to fully accept that they are responsible for shaping their experience. Responsiblity is a beautiful thing to promote.
Posted on 02/24/2007 at 02:38 PM
kevin hogan says...
what i don’t hear is taking the secret and doing good for OTHERS with the philosophy.
that bugs me.
instead i hear, “it’s what they attracted, they don’t want to be pitied, look at the bright eyes of those starving children, etc.”
no one says, “yeah and with all the money we’re going to SELL the FRICKING CAR and send the money to an orphanage in China to save the lives of innocent little girls who may not be alive next year.”
that’s the parat i’m missing.
talk is cheap. actions make the difference.
and a note for blair: if there is no marketing and selling not one person reading this has a job. none. period.
there are drawbacks to just about everything in life. but every marketer or salesperson employs about three people in the world. everyone else is employed (paid) by those people.
as for the reference to self help, it is wonderful for people when it helps. when it turns out to be self hurt because the science isn’t sound, that’s when self help becomes a disaster.
and finally to channeling: I’ll stick with Penn’s version until a channel can ONCE tell me something that isn’t known that IS verifiable.
and man is Cosmic Connie cool or what…
Posted on 02/24/2007 at 02:53 PM
kevin hogan says...
Harvey
THANK YOU for your blatant honesty.
That’s all I was looking for. And you’re 100% right. It’s NOT an issue of science which is where I was hoping to end up at. There’s nothing to measure. It’s a purely subjective state of consciouness. Obviously not a law and certainly not a scientific law as so many have promoted, (like “gravity")
Bless You!
I can go back to work now.
Kevin Hogan
http://www.kevinhogan.comPosted on 02/24/2007 at 02:59 PM
Blair Warren says...
Hi Harvey,
I completely agree about responsibility. That is why I think the people making these claims should be held responsible for making them.
If science cannot prove or disprove LOA, it seems that LOA isn’t scientific, so perhaps it shouldn’t be sold as such.
Maybe it should be packaged with a more accurate label based on your comment, “The Subjective State of Consciousness of Attraction.”
I certainly couldn’t argue with that.
However, I’m confident that since the LOA works every time as its proponents say, it *can* be proven or disproven. And that is one of the main points I hope to shed light on.
If it turns out science can prove it, I will apologize and accept responsibility for expressing doubt.
But if turns out science can disprove it, I hope others will accept responsibility for profiting from unproven ideas and return any money they made based on selling these claims.
Hopefully we’ll soon see how all this shakes out.
Here’s to responsibility!
Posted on 02/24/2007 at 03:02 PM
Hugh Simpson says...
Hi, Blair! I’m Brother Paul’s partner that he mentioned. I’m a former consumer investigative reporter for Post Newsweek TV.
Well what you suggest about my fellow Libertarian reporter, John Stossel, just might interest him. I do have a way I think that I can get to John through my buddy that has been a videographer for years for ABC. He could interview that physicist that is on The Secret.
I will say that I have been using The Secret - The Law of Attraction - personally for well over 25 years. I have a current project at http://www.7thaven.org where my partner Dr. Tim of Credit Mastery and I have pledged to build 7,000,000 homes for the poor and homeless around the world over the next 7 years. Since we announced that project we have attracted several millionaires who want to help and a friend of Lionel Ritchie who is going to write us a theme song. Also a Hollywood fashion designer to the stars wants to be involved.
So does the LOA work? You be the judge!
Hugh
Posted on 02/24/2007 at 04:03 PM
Cosmic Connie says...
Harvey wrote: “People who state the law of attraction as a fact also seem to fully accept that they are responsible for shaping their experience. Responsibility is a beautiful thing to promote.”
I agree, Harvey, that promoting responsibility is a good thing. I also second Kevin’s opinion and applaud your honesty in referring to “a subjective state of consciousness” that can’t be scientifically proven.
And maybe the fact that it cannot be scientifically proven is what has kept serious investigators from tackling “The Secret” and LOA. Also, if you read the various disclosures and disclaimers accompanying LOA marketers’ products and web sites, they pretty much have their legal butts covered the way every other marketer does. ("Your results may vary, “results not guaranteed,” “for informational purposes only,” “not to substitute for professional legal or medical advice or care,” etc. etc. etc.)
It is possible that journalists such as Stossel prefer to focus their efforts on products with quantifiable claims. But I still think approaching him is a worthwhile endeavor, Blair, especially given the runaway popularity of “The Secret.”
But back to the bit about responsibility. When one carries the “self-responsibility” concept to extremes, which many LOA promoters seem to be doing, it can morph into things that aren’t so beautiful. Such as the proverbial “New Age guilt.” Or delusions of grandeur. Even when these things aren’t harmful they are counterproductive.
I agree, Harvey, the LOA folks aren’t selling crack. Nevertheless, some of the stuff they’re hawking is profoundly addictive and, some might argue, harmful in some ways. (Steve Salerno of SHAMblog fame has a thing or two to say about the effects of self-help, etc. on our culture.)
Posted on 02/24/2007 at 04:14 PM
Dan M says...
While your at it could you have him check out a few aspects of organized religion too. Christianity, Catholicism, Muslin, Hindu, etc, and as thoroughly and objectively as he does for the LOA or any other investigative report he might assign hiself to?
There is so much organized religion permeating all areas of society such as schools, politics, communities, and carrying so much weight by virtue of the fact that people “believe” it, and yet, in my 44 years I have yet to see a SINGLE shred of evidence, solid or otherwise, supporting the existence of any kind of god, divine or otherwise.
Belief and Faith.... the cornerstone of any religion.
I’ll test out the LOA. and *I* wil decide if its real or not.
John wouldnt be able to investigate anyways. Who can measure anyones level of faith, determination. But i’ll bet that by reading someones post I can tell whether it’ll work for them or not.
Posted on 02/24/2007 at 04:37 PM
Blair Warren says...
Hi Dan,
I agree with much of what you said. However, I think John Stossel could investigate it because it isn’t being sold as faith or religion. It is being sold as scientific fact. And that *can* be tested.
It’ll be interesting to see if it holds up to the test.
Thanks for taking the time to comment.
Blair
Posted on 02/24/2007 at 04:44 PM
Cosmic Connie says...
You’re probably right, Blair. To the degree that the promoters of “The Secret” and other promoters of LOA materials are presenting it as “science,” it can be put to the test. Maybe. But one potential problem I see is that there’s just enough mysticism in the formula to water down any claims of “pure” science. And the promoters and believers can always say that people for whom LOA doesn’t seem to “work” (in a good way) just weren’t working hard enough. Some would say they just weren’t putting enough feeling or passion into it. So once again, they slip out of the grasp of scientific investigation.
Still, as I’ve said, it’s worth a shot. In fact I just got a new project with a local ABC journalist and...hmmm...he might be able to help in this endeavor.
BTW, for those who are interested, the “science” in “What The Bleep Do We Know” has been pretty thoroughly deconstructed by some real scientists. Not that this will cut into the profits of those who misuse quantum physics to sell their wares and workshops. But I just thought I’d mention it.
And, Hugh, good work. You have my attention. But somehow I have the feeling you would be doing your good works even if you’d never heard of “The Secret” or LOA.
Posted on 02/24/2007 at 05:50 PM
Hakim Chishti says...
Blair. Don’t know if my e-mail got thru to you or not.
Stossel is an employee of ABC News.
Here is his web page: http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Stossel/
Email for the show:
20/20
ABC-TV
147 Columbus Ave
New York, NY 10023
212-456-2020They will not accept story ideas over the phone. They will suggest you fax it to: 212-456-0533
Or mail to:
Story Editor
20/20
147 Columbus Circle
NY, NY 10023If you really want to pitch this story I suggest you contact the producer of his show.
David Sloan is the executive producer last time I knew. Start with him; or the current producer.You should know that the ideas for most of these kinds of “exposes” and specials are brought to ABC (and other network shows)
by professional freelance journalists or feature story writers, who provide a “proposal” of exactly what the show would be.You won’t be able to talk to the producer and tell him what a “great idea” it would be, and they take it from there. They usually will be looking for a complete “story” that their staff can implement from a proposal.
You have to remember that Stossel is mainly on-air talent not an investigative report. Despite how his “persona” is portrayed, he probably seldom writes the copy or scripts for his own shows.
I think the “secret” hysteria is almost past its prime. By the time one could get into all of the background material you propose, the networks probably will have lost interest. Frankly I have a hard time imagining that ABC and 20/20 is not aware of “The Secret” and its issues of veracity.
I was a TV journalist for CBS for almost 10 years. This is how it works, basically.
All the best,
Hakim Chishti
Posted on 02/24/2007 at 07:21 PM
T-Buddha says...
This is all very interesting. When I look at Kevin Hogan’s website he claims his Millionaire MIndset is guaranteed to work because it is based on the Attraction Principle. In an earlier post he argues the difference between principle and law. Anyone can go to Dictionary.com and search the word “principle” and see that many of its defintions mean law! He also claims his subliminal DVDs replace what is missing for people who are not successful, etc. Really? What is everyone fighting about? Someone said to me, as the controversy began brewing, “It sounds like maybe some of the master’s of marketing and hype are envious about all the success of this project!” Is that possible? I have had a lot of respect for Blair and Kevin in the past. Now I’m wondering. P.S. I just noticed the note that if you don’t like a comment you won’t post it. I’m curious to notice if this passes.
Posted on 02/24/2007 at 10:16 PM
Blair Warren says...
Hey T-Buddha,
Can’t speak for Kevin. He’s been commenting here a bit lately so perhaps he’ll address your point.
Am I envious of the success of this project?
As for the marketing juggernaut behind this movement, perhaps. Gotta respect that.
But as for the tactics some appear to be using to sell their wares, not a bit. Not even close.
It is funny you heard this from a friend. A friend of mine told me that when the controversy begins brewing some of the LOA experts will belittle their critics as opposed to addressing their points.
And yes, a friend really did tell me this.
But then again, friends say the damndest things, don’t they?
BTW, though I have been in and around the field of marketing for two decades, I have *never* referred to myself as a “master of marketing” nor anything even close.
Oh, and did you notice I posted your comment unedited?
In three years of writing this blog I’ve only refused to post one comment and that was because it was belligerent and irrelevant to the topic.
Of course, there’s always a next time.
Posted on 02/24/2007 at 11:09 PM
kevin says...
i make sure people know that financial success is completely correlated to: “if you live in a free country” or “if you have access to the internet.” or “if you have average intelligence and close to normal abilities. i’m not sure i’ve written that word “guarantee.” might have, i don’t know.
the subliminal program- that’s the result of scientific study and a hell of a lot of thomas edison fails. i was one of the most vocal skeptics about subliminal anything until the bigger universities started showing that indeed there are some “primes” that when shown subliminally can change behavior...dramatically. it has limitations but it has some almost scary applications as well. i’ve written extensively on the university research and we tested our work with a variety of people including our direct competitors and even their kids.
i can get excited about my work and that of other people’s. i might say something that is puffery now and then but i think at kevinhogan.com we’re pretty responsible in claims and results...because it all matters to me personally.
my beef with the law of attraction(ers) is that unlike blair, i’ve seen first hand harm… a lot of it. remember i’ve done therapy for 15 years, for 11 i was full time. i’ve seen how beliefs like these destroy people through guilt. i’ve watched people...a lot of people harm themselves because they believed they’d be healed by their belief. i could go on and on, i’ll save the bandwith. i’ve seen far more devastation than good and and when something is sold as a LAW it gets in people’s psyche that this WILL happen (as it should) and then of course their kid dies or they get sick. etc.
to say it bothers me, is, an understatement.
my very best
kevin hogan
http://www.kevinhogan.comPosted on 02/25/2007 at 12:23 AM
moi says...
Just want to add that I would NOT get James randi involved, as one of the above commenters suggested. He is objective in a subjective way and would just antagonize people.
Posted on 02/25/2007 at 09:47 AM
Clay Cotton says...
“Successful marketers allow people to tell themselves a story they want to hear...” - Seth Godin
Too true, eh?
Now, promoters of “The Secret” are cynically milking this phenom for all its worth, IMHO.
I gotta respect the explotation of the human foibles here, placing those ageless hooks into human desire. As a promotion, both “The Secret” and “The Law of Attrasction” working: Lotsa buzz, sales, believers.
I’m repulsed by the cynical framing of states of mind as scientific “law”. For shame…
Sure, as a meme the “law of attraction” seems to be popular, yet in practice it is flawed, because attraction is not a LAW but only a PRINCIPLE.
When promoted as law, serious damage can ensure as innocent “true believers” (a la Eric Hoffer) act on this principle as if it were law. Yesterday, Blair told me about a young man who lost over $10,000 on “presenter training” for the Law of Attraction only to have his wishful thinking create zero revenue. Sad…
Ethical promoters must consider Brother Seth’s FULL quote:
“Successful marketers allow people to tell themselves a story they want to hear. Great marketers then do work that they’re proud of, using their leverage to create outcomes that people might not appreciate fully in the short run but are delighted in later on.” - Seth Godin
Put checks on rour greed glands, something “The Secret” and “Law of Attraction” promoters forgot in their cash fest.
- Clay Cotton
“The passion-crazed pianoman who would not sleep with Janis Joplin”
The WORDS: http://immersiversity.com - Come to me
The CD: http://cdbaby.com/claycotton - Buy TWO
The MUSIC: http://claycotton.com - Dig itPosted on 02/25/2007 at 04:28 PM
Clay Cotton says...
fyi, add:
i’m known as a pretty upbeat guy - i support optimism and positive thinking, for sure
yet i live with some very real issues, and my radical positive thinking has not seemed to affect my advanced multiple sclerosis.
also, 40 years of serious optimism and devoted christian science practice did not prevent my mom’s early death from cardiac arrest.
in any case, i will maintain my upbeat attitude come what may, simply because it feels so much better, and this is good enough 4 me…
- Clay Cotton
“The passion-crazed pianoman who would not sleep with Janis Joplin”
The WORDS: http://immersiversity.com - Come to me
The CD: http://cdbaby.com/claycotton - Buy TWO
The MUSIC: http://claycotton.com - Dig itPosted on 02/25/2007 at 04:50 PM
kevin says...
geez clay
40 years of thinking and you haven’t got rid of the wheels yet? you must really suck at this attraction stuff. see if ya’ just learned to do it “right” huh? believed a little harder. and after all you attracted all this anyway.....right?
hey we could go on for days about this, katie says hello, sends love and so do I
you’re the best
kevin
Posted on 02/25/2007 at 04:56 PM
http://immersiversity.com says...
kevin,
jah, mon
i shoulda had more faith - sent more donations to swaggart & tammy faye - trusted in “the law” - bought more “pop spirit” DVDs - ideated more idillic, projected futures…
maybe i had better start some self-thrashing , too?
somehow with all the verbage and lingo around this, i’m remember how Yogi Berra explained Jazz:
“Interviewer: Can you explain jazz?
Yogi: I can’t, but I will. 90% of all jazz is half improvisation. The other half is the part people play while others are playing something they never played with anyone who played that part. So if you play the wrong part, its right. If you play the right part, it might be right if you play it wrong enough. But if you play it too right, it’s wrong.
Interviewer: ??
Yogi: Anyone who understands jazz knows that you can’t understand it. It’s too complicated. That’s what’s so simple about it.
Interviewer: Do you understand it?
Yogi: No. That’s why I can explain it. If I understood it, I wouldn’t know anything about it.
Interviewer: What is syncopation?
Yogi: That’s when the note that you should hear now happens either before or after you hear it. In jazz, you don’t hear notes when they happen because that would be some other type of music. Other types of music can be jazz, but only if they’re the same as something different from those other kinds.
Interviewer: Now I really don’t understand.
Yogi: I haven’t taught you enough for you to not understand jazz that well.”
yogi coulda been in the Secret movie, eh?
luv to kevin, katie, blair and yes… to “even YOU”
/clay
Posted on 02/25/2007 at 10:51 PM
Juliet says...
Lotsa great posts here. Thanks to my dear Brother Clay for directing me here. I have never seen the movie or studied LOA specifically, but from what I have seen posted here, it seems to resonate with a lot of New Age books, audios, etc. that I have studied over the years. Never read Neale Donald Walsch’s books - just was not drawn to them. I was given a tape of Abraham Hicks years ago - strange stuff channeling - maybe a marketing tactic to get people to believe what the channel is saying cause they don’t think people will believe them as themselves. Bizarre psychological stuff there.
This topic is definitely hot potato stuff.
On the one hand, I have seen things change in my life because of my state of conciousness - both positive and negative changes. I have seen my state of conciousness affect how often synchronicty apprears in my life, how often big “WHOA NELLY - I dreamed this already” or “seeing lotsa puzzle pieces click into place” moments happen in my life. BUT…
What about everyone else’s states of conciousness? (I have a real difficult time resonating with the idea that my children, my husband, my relatives, etc are not real and just part of a matrix that I created.)
What about doing things to make a positive difference in the world?What about social responsibility?
The only thing I know for sure to be true for me is the interconnectedness of all things.
Religions and other organized belief systems usually seem to be methods of control.
And to market a principal as a law does seem misleading to say the least and could cause harm.
I am not so sure about Laws anyhow. I have seen Laws not always be fixed, like time for example. I don’t think the universe is as rigid as a lot of people believe.
Posted on 02/26/2007 at 01:23 AM
Geoff says...
The Secret is a rehash of the old Gnostic/neo-New Age notions seeking a new crop of devotees...grow up humanity…
Posted on 02/26/2007 at 11:23 PM
Lawrence says...
I love a good debate, and what I always come away with is that there will always be differences. Those who get hurt or damaged would be like those who win the lottery and end up broke a year later. Those who study their enemy and take advantage of what can benefit them will be better off than those who blindly deny or refuse anything just because they do not believe in ‘it.’ And yes, most of everything under the sun is not new, and with a few alterations are rehashes of old notions and beliefs. The cave man probably wished he could fly, only didn’t have the accumulated technology to do it. I like blondes and you like brunettes; and you and I will get hurt or feel rapture some of the time. Should we ban women or work hard at trying to discredit them? Or should we just let people learn from their experiences, good or bad, and let things evolve as they will; sort of like the Christian Right finding out that the politicians they trusted in were just the same garden variety snakes who took them in confidence and used them for their own ends. Sooner or later it all comes out. Maybe the idea or belief in something starts out as personal, then later gets promoted as a product, then gets institutionalized, then shows contradictions. Does this mean we have to believe in the whole package, or maybe only in what pertains to us individually? Our country right or wrong means we’d still be serving tea and crumpets at noon. Why don’t we just wait for the tipping point on this one, and then crow about it if we were right, or feel embarrassed if we were wrong.
Posted on 02/28/2007 at 05:55 PM
http://cdbaby.com/claycotton says...
either plugging or criticizing ‘the secret’ can only take us so far, methinx, then we hit a wall, then there are diminishing returns for all involved - so now let’s take it in an edutaining, learning direction
1. go here and add ur 2cents, ok?
methinx this is a conversation u want to add to
http://immersiversity.com/?p=38#more-38
2. please lemme know where & how u think i can plug my little discussion
3. please mention http://immersiversity.com in ur journeys, as u r so inclined…
now, i guess i gotta go get famous again, like before
love,
/clay
Posted on 03/05/2007 at 10:02 PM
Leave a comment
Next entry: Please shoot holes in these
Previous entry: False alarm. Sorry folks.
