The Godless Delusion

I’ll start by saying that this article is not meant to tell you what to think, but it is meant to poke holes in how some people think.  Maybe more importantly to poke holes in how they try to control what other people think by using insults.  What I do have a problem with is when someone will put down another person for their beliefs, which of course goes for both sides of the fence.

This post is really aimed at people that have an air of intellectual superiority about not believing in God.  They will make fun of God-believers and even call them delusional.  They will claim that a belief in God is irrational and illogical.  Well, I claim that these people are actually irrational and therefore hypocritical and they are deluding themselves into a false sense of superiority based on false assumptions and poor logic.  That’s why I’ve titled this the Godless Delusion.

My view of the Godless Delusion is that it is the belief that can be summed up as “You believe in something that doesn’t exist.  You can’t prove it exists but I can prove what I believe, which makes your belief irrational.”  I have no problem at all with atheists and in fact I think it is a valid belief system, but it is a belief system and not a factual system.

(P.S. Yes, I am a stirrer and yes, I like to challenge and pose difficult questions.  If you think you may suffer the Godless Delusion and don’t like challenges then perhaps you’d better go read about Santa Claus.)

You can't see it, but it is staring you in the face.

There are certain standard arguments that are always pulled out by people suffering the Godless Delusion. Here are the ones I can remember and then I’ll deal with each one individually:

  1. God does not exist.  You are making a positive assertion that God exists and you can’t prove that assertion so it is totally invalid, and I don’t have to prove anything because I’m not making a positive assertion.
  2. There is no tangible evidence for God so there is no reason to believe God exists.
    1. If God did exist and was so powerful then why isn’t there any clear evidence?
    2. I only believe in real things like gravity.  If I let go of a ball it drops every time but there’s no equivalent for God.
  3. I refuse to believe in what someone else tells me to but I will only believe in hard reality.
  4. Science has already proven beyond doubt most of the things we used to blame on God so your God is diminishing as science finds more and more answers.  It is only a matter of time before science shows there is no need at all for a story about God.
  5. The second law of thermodynamics is only for closed systems so evolution does not go against it because the sun provides an external energy source.  Your concept of God has no scientific backing.
  6. It isn’t possible for God to just think or wish the universe into existence.  What created God?

That’ll do for a start so here is my analysis of why each one of them is irrational and/or based on false assumptions and at worst hypocritical when used against someone else.

1.       God does not exist.  You are making a positive assertion that God exists and you can’t prove that assertion so it is totally invalid to start with, and I don’t have to prove anything because I’m not making a positive assertion.

There are plenty of positive assertions made that had no “proof” to start with but are generally accepted to be true.  Did Darwin’s theory of evolution have a large body of proof when it was first made?  No.  Did that make evolution invalid?  That’s an area where this type of thinking is (in my view) totally hypocritical.  Science demands no “proof” at all.  It requires an assumption to be made.  The starting point is an assumption or a guess or a belief (a hypothesis or positive assertion).  If there is any reasonable evidence for it then the investigation continues.  The assertion is never actually “proven” to be right but it is only assumed right if there is no evidence found against it (not proven to be wrong).  Darwin started with an unproven belief and then went about finding evidence to back up his belief and the hypothesis is repeatable and is able to make predictions and explain natural phenomena.  There has been no evidence found to prove it wrong so it is widely accepted.  There is no hard and fast “proof” that evolution as a whole is real.  However science believes it to be true (and I do too) because it is the best known explanation for what has been observed.  Therefore having no “proof” for evolution does not make it false, and having no “proof” for God does not make it false.

We also come down to exactly what “proof” is required.  If anybody asks me to “prove” there is a God I always ask what type of proof will satisfy them.  There’s no point setting up a test with no criteria for success or failure or it isn’t really a test.  There’s more on this point later with the discussions on cause and effect.

Of course saying that God does not exist is also a positive assertion.  It is stating a definite principle.  It is like saying there is no elephant in my room.  If I simply said I don’t believe there’s an elephant then that’s a totally different matter and is opinion based on personal experience not a positive assertion that there definitely is not one.  If a person is going to hold someone accountable to a set of rules then they should apply those same rules to themselves.

2.       There is no evidence for God so there is no reason to believe God exists.

a.       If God did exist and was so powerful then why isn’t there any clear evidence?

b.      I only believe in real things like gravity.  If I let go of a ball it drops every time but there’s no equivalent evidence for God.

Ah, this is getting better.  Now we are talking about evidence and not “proof” so we can have a much more rational and logical and science based discussion about it.  We’ll start with the evidence for gravity.  It is pretty convincing isn’t it and demonstrates without doubt that gravity exists, or does it?  Let’s break it down into its components.  We live in a world of cause and effect as nicely summarised by Newton’s laws of motion.

A ball falling to earth is the effect.  The effect is consistent and probably demonstrates that there is a consistent cause.  (That’s a hypothesis at this stage and not a fact.)  But what is the cause?  We call it gravity to explain that phenomena and then because we give the effect a name and someone tells us the same name is the cause we believe it because the effect is obvious.  The confusion is that the cause and the effect have the same name (in general language).  We look at the effect and assume the cause.

But what is cause of gravity?  Well nobody really knows except that for simple observation it acts simply (like the ball falling) but it indeed works in mysterious ways.  It is the weakest of all the primary forces but is believed to be largely responsible for holding the mass of the universe together.  Sometimes it turns itself off, which is theoretically impossible.  It is constant but isn’t constant in some circumstances.  It extends out to infinity (the furthest star in the universe is actually affected by your personal gravity).  We simply don’t know how or why it works – it is a mystery that nobody has so far been able to solve.  Yet we believe in it as if it is a “fact” not a mystery.  Yes, the effect of the ball falling is a fact, but the cause is indeed a mystery (with a name).

I find it truly amazing that people will hold up a mystery to debunk a mystery.  They will say your theory has no known cause but my theory with no known cause is fact and yours is irrational which is proof that my belief is superior to yours.

The effects of the world are obvious (mostly) but the causes are mostly a mystery, even today.  Just because we give the cause and effect the same name and say the effect is known doesn’t mean we know the cause.  It is delusional to think we understand all the causes because we can see the effects and give names to what we assume are causes.

Another argument to this line of “evidence based” reasoning is simply to ask if they believe in love.  Generally speaking they will say yes because they’ve experienced it.  Therefore by their reasoning experience is valid evidence for something that has no tangible evidence available.  Yet they’ll ignore the experience of countless millions of people that have experienced the love of God.  If you think that’s an outlandish view then how would you react to a person who says that love does not exist anywhere for anyone because they have not personally experienced it?

3.       I refuse to believe in what someone else tells me to but I will only believe in hard reality.

Would a person like this believe in quantum mechanics if they can’t see it for themselves?  If they argue that someone else has seen the evidence and that’s acceptable then we get back to the discussion about what is suitable evidence and for what – the cause or the effect.  It’s impossible to know all tangible reality personally.  Some things have to be taken on faith, whether you choose to put your faith in other people and which people, or elsewhere is a matter of choice but it is still faith.

Science is quite happy to not know the cause of the big bang.  Do they discount the big bang totally because there is no evidence for a cause?  No, they assume there is a cause and continue on the assumption that one day they’ll find it or even if not found that it is “findable” by science.  That’s a pretty big assumption right there.  It’s kind of the reverse of “God did it” in that “science knows it”.  It is simple blind faith that the unknown will be revealed in a certain known way.  I don’t have a problem with that at all, but I do have a serious problem when someone who is doing that calls someone else that is doing exactly the same thing irrational or illogical or delusional – at least they are not being hypocritical.

Here’s another way to look at it…

There is physical “reality” (and one theory is that it doesn’t exist except as a construct of thought) which is indeed mysterious and confusing and in the large part contradictory, but does that mean those teachings are actual reality itself or an approximation of it? If the teachings are not exact do we throw out all of science and say all this reality nonsense is contradictory rubbish? I certainly don’t.

Then there is metaphysical “reality” (and one theory is that it doesn’t exist except as a construct of thought) which is also mysterious and confusing and in the large part contradictory, but does that mean those teachings are actual reality itself or an approximation to it? If the teachings are not exact do we throw out religion and say all this “God” nonsense is contradictory rubbish? I certainly don’t.

4.       Science has already proven beyond doubt most of the things we used to blame on God so your God is diminishing as science finds more and more answers.  It is only a matter of time before science shows there is no need at all for a story about God.

On one hand this is quite true, but we need to be careful to differentiate between superstition and a theory of God.

It’s also interesting to note that as science delves into the smallest (quantum mechanics) and also the biggest (astrophysics) it is finding common ground that is pointing to a “God like” entity that has always existed and is indestructible and is the cause of all things.

Science by its very nature is reductionist, which means that it breaks things apart in order to understand it.  That works incredibly well and is the reason why we have such amazing technology available to us.  However that benefit also has the disadvantage that it sometimes fails to see the bigger picture which is not under its microscope.  Was Einstein wrong because he never found the unifying force, or is it simply that it hasn’t been found yet by using traditional scientific methods?  Could this force explain God and the methods of God’s creation?  More to the point, would this prove once and for all that God does exist and explain his methods, or because we put a name to it that is “not God” will it prove that God cannot exist?  Same evidence but vastly different conclusions based on underlying assumptions!  Again I’ll ask “what is suitable evidence to prove God?”

I’m certainly not saying that God is proven in any way, but I am saying that it is irrational to suggest that the fact science exists in some way disproves God.   Also see the last paragraph of the next section that explains they are quite separate.

I’ll leave the last word on this to Albert Einstein (who contrary to some opinions did not believe in a traditional “God” but also was not an atheist):  “Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe — a spirit vastly superior to that of man.”

5.       The second law of thermodynamics is only for closed systems so evolution does not go against it because the sun provides an external energy source.  Your concept of God has no scientific backing.

So then what about the universe itself and the second law (which in a nutshell states that everything tends towards greater randomness, or decays unless acted upon by an external energy source)?  How did the universe become so organised after the Big Bang?  If the universe is a closed system then the universe breaks the laws of the universe.  If the universe is not a closed system then there must be an energy source outside the universe which powers the greater organisation we see today compared to the randomness at the Big Bang.  (I’d like someone to seriously try to debunk this argument because I might have it wrong but I just can’t see a way around it).

If there is a power greater than the entire universe itself then what is it?  What’s wrong with giving it the name of God?  If we called it “Gazumpta” would it disprove God?  Why would it not be intelligent if it created intelligence?  How could we hope to understand it rationally if it is bigger than the entire universe?  Why then call someone irrational if they choose to believe it may exist?

To my way of thinking the only way the universe can obey the laws of the universe is for there to be an unknown intelligent creative force that is greater than the entire universe and powers all that we see and is the driving force for all of creation and life.  Give it any name you like but (in my opinion) it rationally and logically really should exist.  To call people who believe in it delusional is maybe just a bit defensive of an indefensible dogmatic position.

It’s also my contention that God is beyond the reach of science.  If you believe most Holy Scriptures the effects of God are everywhere so we’ll ignore those effects for the sake of argument as “not suitable evidence” but we’ll look for the cause.  The cause actually created the physical and so can’t be seen directly in it.  We can say that the signature of the designer is on the creation but that means nothing to someone who doesn’t believe in the creator in the first place.  But science is based on evidence and generally speaking circumstantial or direct evidence to support a theory or direct evidence to disprove a theory.  There is not and cannot be direct physical evidence for a non-physical creative God, therefore science must remain silent on the issue.  Scientific principles can be used in logical discussions, but that is far from evidence for or against God.

6.       It isn’t possible for God to just think or wish the universe into existence.  What created God?

God by definition is infinite and eternal.  God has no beginning or end.  Therefore the “God theory” steps outside of the cause-effect conundrum and solves it.  You only get the cause-effect problem if you believe that only the physical universe exists, which then needs a creator, which needs a creator etc.

Only the “God theory” solves that problem.  God didn’t spontaneously come into existence because God is beyond (more than) mere existence. Existence is the effect and God is the cause of existence. Existence can’t cause existence. So then what caused existence?  Of course you can always say there is some “stuff” that is infinite and eternal and intelligent and creative and give it a name and then say God can’t exist because we have a theory of “stuff”.  That is really just playing with words.

There is also a basic assumption to this line of reasoning that only the physical universe exists.  If there is more to the universe than just the physical then the door opens for the possibility of God, and remember I’m talking about people who say adamantly that there is no God.  What proof is there that there is nothing beyond the physical?  You can’t prove it with the physical because you can’t prove what’s outside it with what’s inside it.  They can only take it on blind faith that there is only the physical tangible world and nothing more.  How can they then berate a person for having faith?

*****

Just as a last comment I do find it endlessly amusing that people who do not believe in God will quote the Bible and say “That is what God is”.  However they interpret and define it very strictly and narrowly so it would be impossible for anything to fit the description, but they’ll use that definition as “proof” that God cannot exist.

In summary, a theory of creation that includes a God-like entity is plausible and defensible using logic and rational thought processes.  A theory that denies a God-like entity may or may not be rational and logical but no more so that the God theory.  Feel free to have and believe in any theory you care to choose but also please do not put down people who believe in God as being irrational or illogical (not all of them anyway).

Please feel free to tell me where my arguments are illogical or where I’ve got it totally wrong.  You can also add your own points you’ve heard from those who suffer from the Godless Delusion.  If you merely want to defend your own dogma that’s fine too.

Advertisements
Posted in Awareness | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Formula for Happiness

There are many books and ideas out there on happiness and how to get it.  Many of them are right or part right but there is also a simple formula that you need to know so you can make happiness work for you.  It isn’t the only thing you need to know about happiness but if you don’t know about the formula then the chances of you actually being happy are pretty slim.  Some people use it automatically without reading about it, but for the most of us I think it will help to be reminded of what it is:

Happiness is when expectation meets reality.

That sounds pretty simple but the use of it can get a bit complex with some interesting twists so I’ll try to explain it the best I can.

Make a wish and blow it to the breeze.

We live in a western materialistic world, (I do anyway so I shouldn’t try to guess where you are from and how you live your life) so most of us might read the formula and agree and go about changing our external material reality to meet our internal expectations.  That’s how we’ve been programmed to operate – set a goal for what will make us happy then we work to achieve it, or work to get the money to buy it.  In other words we try to make our reality meet our expectations.  That’s one way to make the formula work for you, but really, how well is that working for most of us and our society as a whole?  If it was working why aren’t more of us happy?  If it isn’t working for us then why not?

Some people are not as materialistic and are more spiritual by nature so instead of working or buying their way into happiness they have no need for that so they manifest material stuff into their lives to make their reality match their expectations to make them happy.  Again, there’s nothing wrong with that as long as it is truly what you want to do and it’s working for you.  But to my way of thinking it is spiritualising materialism and trying to change the outside world and not your internal thoughts.

What if we were to look at it the other way around and work on our internal expectations and make them match our external reality?  Could that work?  Shouldn’t it be easier to change our internal thoughts rather than our external reality?

You’ve probably heard about people travelling to poor parts of the world and telling about the happy smiling faces of the children, or how some people in truly appalling conditions or life circumstances can be happy.  How is that possible when their reality is so bad?  I believe it is because their expectations match their reality, and not the other way around.  They see their lot in life and don’t expect more so they are happy with it (the grass is green enough where they are so they don’t need to look on the other side of the hill).  They work on what they have direct control over, which is their own expectations.

Now I’m not saying that you should lower your expectations so that you are alone, homeless, bankrupt, and riddled with disease.  That would simply be putting your expectations somewhere that is different to your reality.  What I am saying is that you should take a good look at your life and the reality around you and where reasonable adjust your expectations so they are much closer to your reality.  The closer they match the happier you will be.  That’s simply how it works and I don’t think you can avoid it.

You can either work with the formula so your expectations and your reality match, or you can work against it and have your expectations constantly move away from your reality (which strangely enough is what most of us are taught to do by constantly resetting goals).

There is a little twist to this to be careful of.

I am not saying that you should have no goals or no desires or that you should stagnate and do nothing.  That’s a common “trick” people tell themselves so they can then ignore the entire message and go back to their old comfortable ways.  What I am saying is that you should have no goals or desires that are set with the purpose to make you happy because they will do the opposite.  If you set the goal and reach it, you will be happy for a short time and then exactly as you are taught you will set a new goal so you will be unhappy again.  It does work for some people and they love the thrill of the chase, if that works for you and you want to continue then don’t let me stop you.  If it isn’t working for you then I’m simply asking you to consider why it isn’t working and suggesting a way out of the dilemma.

Here’s a little experiment for you to try to see if it makes sense or is just some theory that has no real use.  Try it as a simple thought experiment for about 10 minutes where you think about the options and how it would work or not work.  That’s not too long to see how happiness will work for you is it?

Here’s the experiment: Manifest happiness – right here and right now.  Don’t beat around the bush and spend time to manifest the “stuff” that will make you happy but go direct to the source and simply be absolutely totally happy right here and right now.

Spend about 10 minutes or longer if you want but at least 10 minutes, thinking about your expectations and also your reality if you were truly absolutely happy right now exactly as you are.  If you meditate then meditate on it, if not then just think about it.  You are absolutely truly happy.  Not tomorrow, not in a short time, but right now.  You are truly absolutely happy with yourself and your life and your world.

What does that feel like, right now?  If you are truly absolutely happy right now what are your expectations?  What do you want to happen in the future if right now is blissful?  What things do you need to make you happy if you are truly happy right now?  If you are truly happy right now does the formula for happiness make sense to you and do your expectations match your reality?

When you are finished read on.

No peeking now.

Really, no peeking, just try it.  It’s only 10 minutes.

Wait until you have done the experiment so it has the maximum benefit for you and your life and you aren’t just reading the words of some stranger but seeing how the stranger’s words correspond with what you’ve just experienced.

When you imagined being totally happy right now did your expectations match your reality?  I think they must have.  If they didn’t match then there was something you were not happy about so you couldn’t have been imagining total happiness.  Of course if it just didn’t seem right then our two belief systems do not match at all and I’m sorry for wasting your time.  It’s possible that our underlying beliefs are so widely apart that we simply won’t see eye to eye.  But assuming we are even close then it might be worthwhile you working on your expectations rather than working on your reality.

What about goals for the future then?  Do you just give up?  Well, actually some people do and that’s a choice you have.  There are other options as well.  The most important one is that any goal you set is done for your entertainment or education or any other reason except for happiness.  You don’t need “stuff” to make you happy, even if that stuff is something like spirituality or enlightenment.  By all means go for the biggest and best 3-D LED TV with hi-fi surround sound or enlightenment, but you don’t need it to be happy.  Only go for it if you want it.

What do you think? How did the experiment go for you?

Posted in Awareness, Behaviour | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

3 easy steps to manage 3 easy steps

Somehow whenever I see something that says “you can do anything in just 3 easy steps” I seem to try and fail.  The steps are never quite as easy as they seem at first.  It really makes me feel a bit deflated until I find the 3 easy steps to get rid of the deflated feeling.  So I’ve developed this guide to following easy steps.  To make it user friendly I’ve written it in 3 easy steps.

1.       Following my steps means we MUST end up in different places.

Why?  Because we started in different places.

Watch out for the first step

The easier the steps seem the more likely that we’ll end up further apart.  I could give you precise latitude and longitude for the starting point and then measurements and compass points for each successive step with exact guides on how you use your equipment.  But somehow this is no longer “3 easy steps” but a full instruction manual.  But even then I could only make sure that you’d be a bit closer to me based on the accuracy of my and your equipment and your ability to exactly follow instructions and for me to make sure no tiny step has been left out.

When it comes to personal development the starting point can make a huge difference.  Not to mention the amount of baggage that needs to be carried over those 3 easy steps.  Just because I can do it doesn’t mean you have to be able to do the same in the same way.

While I’m at it, also beware of the false starting point.  Quite often you read the 3 easy steps and it says anybody can do it because I did and I’m a normal person.  That’s fine and dandy, but when you read their personal story you find out that just before they found the magic secret about riches they were in debt up to their ears and about to face bankruptcy or were living on the streets.  That was their true starting point, not the bit about being a “normal person”.  Their real first step might have been to get a real passion for money as if nothing else in life mattered.

2.       It isn’t the steps you can see that you have to worry about.

Most of us have probably set goals before.  It is an idea of an achievement we want in our lives.  Between now and that goal in the future is a process full of very many steps we need to climb and sometimes we need to climb down some to get back on the right staircase.  The goal is not just a simple step and we know it.

“Learn to read music” is not a step but a goal.  “Be pure of heart” is not a step but a goal.  “Eliminate limiting beliefs” is not a step but a goal.  “Meditate on awareness daily” is not a step but a goal.  You get the idea.  Learn to differentiate between a step and a goal.  Sometimes those 3 easy steps might actually be 3 goals in disguise.  Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but it WILL make a huge difference to your attitude when or if you stumble on that first “step”.

3.       Apples and oranges aren’t lemons.

What’s easy for me might be totally frustrating and difficult for you, or the other way around.  It’s like comparing apples and oranges.  We all have different skills and talents and just because something doesn’t come as easily to you as other people (or at least as other people tell you) is no reason to think you can’t eventually master the skill – it will just take a bit more time and dedication.  That doesn’t mean you are a lemon for not “getting it” immediately and it also doesn’t mean the instructions are lemons because the writer hasn’t taken into consideration every person that might be reading it.  You need to be able to adapt the instructions to your circumstances and your particular talents; if you can’t then avoid it or make lemonade.

Now, at huge expense to myself and at absolutely no cost to yourself I’m going to give you a free bonus – a fourth step.  But wait – there’s more.  Not only is it free but for a limited time I’m offering you a 100% no obligation money back guarantee.

4.       Don’t trust the fourth step.

Hey, get real.  What’s the use of 3 steps just hanging in mid-air?  They have to get you from somewhere to somewhere else or they really are a bit useless.  We’ve already discussed the starting point in the first of our steps so you already know to be sure you are starting from a similar place to the person giving the instructions, or if not you can relate it to your current position in life.  But what about the fourth step – the landing when you are finished?

Is it really a place you want to be?  Did you want it before you were “sold” on the idea by someone else?  If you want it why do you want it, and is that a good reason?  Will you have to give anything up to get it (you almost always do) and is that a reasonable sacrifice?

So by now I hope you know you can’t trust anything I say in these easy steps – trust me on that.  Stay tuned for my 3 easy steps to developing trust.  It will cost you a small fortune but by now you really need it.

Posted in Behaviour | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Your Belief System

The support for your life and your goals is your belief system.  If your belief system does not support your goals they will not be achieved.  If your belief system does not support your life as you want it then your life will not be as you want.

It’s as simple as that!

Your belief system that supports your goals and your life is made up of three parts:

  • Your beliefs
  • Your values, and
  • Your motivations.

All three are intertwined and work together and sometimes it is hard to know which is which, but they are all there.

The following diagram helps to explain it better than words can do.

A balanced belief system

Each level builds on the one below it to create a stable platform for you to live your life.

The up arrows on each level of the platform are supporting beliefs, supporting values or supporting motivations.  These will help you to be stable in living the life you want to lead or will support you in achieving your goals.  Without these supports your life will tumble.

The down arrows on each level of the platform are limiting beliefs, limiting values or limiting motivations.  These will limit your growth and destabilise your life so it cannot be what you want it to be and will limit your actions so you are unlikely to achieve your goals.  These will hold you back and make you unbalanced.

If your beliefs and values are destabilised then you will need super strong motivation to counteract that and get what you want.  There are people out there like that and you might know some of them, but it is always hard work.

You can also have more than one platform to cover different areas in your life.  That’s why people can excel in one area but not be too great in another area.

It’s also possible for the same belief or value to be supporting in one area but limiting in another.  For example the value of “Being nice is more important than being rich and you can’t be both” will support your friendships but limit your wealth creation.

An easy way to remember the three separate levels is by asking the following questions:

Beliefs: What do I believe about…?
Values:  What is important to me about…?
Motivation:  What do I want with regards to…?

That looks fine and easy when you just read it, but what happens if you have a very strong limiting belief or value or motivation?  That means that the down arrows get bigger and heavier than the up arrows, and you platform gets lop sided.  You can think of the limiting beliefs as heavy weights dragging you down and supporting beliefs as springs holding you up.  Have a look at the next picture.

An unbalanced belief system just makes life hard

Do you ever get the feeling that you are always running up hill no matter what you do in your life?  Now you might have a better idea of how that can happen even when you are not going anywhere.  In the above diagram the limiting beliefs and limiting values and limiting motivations are all very strong and causing the platform of your life to be unbalanced.

I think being balanced is to get to the limiting beliefs, limiting values and limiting motivations and reduce them in size, and at the same time increase the size of the supporting beliefs, supporting values and supporting motivations.  When you understand what holds you back and why then you have a chance to be more balanced and get what you want.

True balance is achieved by working on every aspect of your belief system and not just the surface motivation which is the easy target for a quick fix.

*******

Your belief system is also the support for your goals.  The principle is exactly the same except that instead of you standing at the top, it is your rocket ship that will take you to your goals since your goals are not where you are now but where you want to be in the future.  The rocket ship of your goals will take you there.

The rocket to your goals is fuelled by you effort and navigated by your specific plans.

Without your effort the rocket will not go very far and you will not achieve your goals.  If you don’t have good plans for navigation you could hit any target, or miss entirely.

If your platform is unbalanced then you will need extra good plans to make up for the bad start.  Alternatively you can just have huge reserves of effort and stamina to just keep on going regardless of how you started or where you are going.

The target is also important because if you set a target that is too difficult and too far off into the future you will need huge amounts of energy just to keep going with no end in sight, and also need brilliant navigation to get you there if things change on the way.  If it is too far away then maybe break it up into steps.

On the other hand, if the target is too easy and too close it is hardly worth the effort of always launching rocket ships so eventually you won’t bother even trying.

The best and easiest way is to have a balanced platform before you start.  Have a well-defined plan that is achievable but challenging, have a good navigation system that is flexible if something changes while you are in the air, and then enjoy the ride.

Remember that you can have belief systems and goals and plans in many different parts of your life all at the same time.  Some of these may include, love, career, finances, health, family, relationships, spirituality, and community.  How is each of these going for you?  Score each one out of 10 and see which needs a bit of extra balance or effort.

*******

But wait, haven’t we forgotten something?

All of those platforms need to stand on something solid and have some foundation that underpins it all. What could that be?

You can find your belief system through the three questions of:

Beliefs: What do I believe about…?

Values:  What is important to me about…?

Motivation:  What do I want with regards to…?

So what do all of these questions produce?

A statement of who you think you are.

Identity: I am….

Your identity is even more fundamental than your beliefs about a given situation because it defines what you believe about your Self, not just the outside world.

Your “I am…” statements are what you use to define yourself to your Self. If you believe that you are not worth loving then no matter how motivated you are to find love or how important it is to you then chances are you will not find it or when you do you’ll find a way to lose it again.  You might end up stuck in and endless loop of finding it (based on your belief system) and then losing it (based on your “I am…” statement).  The same principle applies to money or success or anything else I can think of.

Have you noticed that some guides to setting goals say that your goals should start with a phrase like “I am…” or to put your goal into the present tense so you feel like you have it right now? I think these types of goals go to the heart of the matter and adjust the foundations of your belief system.  Of course your belief system also needs to be in order, but at least now you’ll understand how it all works and fits together.

If this makes sense to you and you want examples of how it works in real life, or more information on your personality, or how your entire system works, then there is a free 100 page report available for immediate download (no sign-up, no email, just click and download) at Click here to go to the download.

Posted in Behaviour | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

How to Live Rich in 3 easy steps

OK, here we go on the simplest and fastest way available on the internet or anywhere else to help you live rich.  Guaranteed or your money back.

First of all we need to look at exactly what will be needed to make you “rich”.

Will it be $1,000,000 or maybe even $25,000,000.  That should do it, don’t you think?  If you had 25 million dollars you’d feel pretty rich.  If that isn’t enough then just substitute a number that suits you.  Remember this is how to live rich, not obscenely rich so try to be just a bit realistic (like $25,000,000 is just a bit realistic).

Mmmmm, Nice.

So let’s see what sort of lifestyle you’d have with your $25,000,000.

How would you treat your bills and debts?  What?  You think you’d have none!  Well we are always in debt of some kind in our world even if only for a very short time and it comes in the form of an invoice or bill.  So how would you treat them?  If it was me I’d pay them all on time and in full.

Would you be able to buy a private Lear jet?  Maybe an island in the Maldives?  What about the most expensive house in your state or country?  Nope, I didn’t think so.  You might be able to get the purchase price together but maintenance would eventually dry up everything you have and make you bankrupt.

Speaking of which, could you put the money under your bed and just keep taking some out when you needed it?  Well, maybe if you had very modest living standards and didn’t plan to live very long but you’d be far better off to invest some so it kept on making more money for you.  Even if that was to put it into an interest bearing bank account it would still be an investment to provide future income.

But what about your lifestyle?  How would that be with a huge amount of money?  Well, I bet you would enjoy yourself and spend time and money on yourself and not just slave away all day to make more money that you didn’t really need anyway. You would enjoy yourself.  Woo Hoo.

So, to wrap it all up this is how to live rich in 3 easy steps:

  1. Live within your means.
  2. Pay all debts on time and in full.
  3. Invest a portion of your money for the future.

And just as a bonus for you today, and only for today (unless you come back to read this tomorrow) here is an extra special fourth tip, that might just be the most important.

4.  Enjoy what you have instead of pining for what’s not yours.

Why do you think that most people who win the lottery lose all their money (and often more) in a very short space of time?  It’s because even with all that money they don’t know how to live rich.  Living rich is not a money issue at all but is an attitude and lifestyle issue.  The amount of money only changes the level of living rich, not if you can or not.  Some people without a lot of money live very rich lives, and as you’d know some people
with a lot of money do not live rich at all.

Are you living rich today, and if not, why not?  Seriously; why not?  If you had some extra dollars would you be living rich with it or living exactly the way you do now but with some extra dollars?  Living rich is not a money issue.  What’s stopping you from living rich
today?

Try it.
You might like it.

Posted in Behaviour | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Time Management can be a waste of time

In this article I’m going to try to explain why even attempting time management is setting yourself up for failure, and then give an alternative that might set you up for success.

But first off an introduction:

Not THE Everest but MY Everest

Let’s say you were surfing the web and came across a page by me that promised to teach you how to climb Mt Everest. In that page I explained that I’m just an ordinary person and if I could do it then there’s no reason why you couldn’t do it as well. All you have to do is follow my simple 7 step plan and you could be on top of Mt Everest in a month.

You might think “Cool, I’d like to try that” and buy my plan (if you really want one I can make one up and sell it to you) and start following it. But before too long you’d start getting a few doubts and think you’ve got nothing to wear there, or you really wouldn’t like to eat tinned food every day for weeks on end. When you fail and ask for a refund I’d simply say that it works for other people and you didn’t follow the plan so it is your fault (you can still buy the plan if you like – trust me).

The reason is simple… While you were thinking that it would be cool to try it, your subconscious mind (that I’m sorry to say is sooooo much smarter than you) knew it would be too difficult and wasn’t really trying at all. In fact, while you were reading my original page your subconscious mind was probably telling you to hit the back button and get out of there. Fortunately (for me) you ignored it and decided to keep reading, keep reading, keep reading, keep reading.

Why you will probably fail at time management:

It’s impossible.

Yep, you might think it is a great idea and something you really need but meanwhile your subconscious mind (that is sooooo much smarter than you) realises that time management is impossible. Your subconscious mind deals with simple realities based on information it is provided. It doesn’t second guess or logically analyse things it just works with what it’s given. (Well it does a whole lot more but that’s all it does in this process). You say “manage my time” and it replies “You’ve got 24 hours in a day I can’t manage that. It’s impossible.”

Now, if you are like most of us you are a stubborn thing and try to force it to manage your time because you’ve been told it is what you need to do to get your life in order. You are now fighting yourself and the stronger part of you (the stubborn or the wise) will win out. So you might succeed even if you have set yourself up for failure, but wouldn’t you rather do it the easier way.

How to set yourself up for success:

Don’t try the impossible. Simply try task management.

You have a certain amount of time in the day, don’t try to manage that but simply work with it. But you also have a certain number of tasks you want to achieve in that time so you CAN manage that.

Manage your tasks and allocate them to the time you have available. Your time is fixed and you can’t manage it, but your tasks are variable and you can manage those.

This is a tip that I learned a long time ago that has helped me a lot. Usually tasks come in two different types, or a mix of the two: Important or Urgent. Work on the important ones first. The urgent ones usually only seem important right now but as the time limit passes they are insignificant. If you have a task on your list then ask yourself if it is important and why. If it isn’t important then put it to the bottom of the list and work on the ones that are important to you.

Here’s the real world difference… There will be hiccups, and that’s one thing I can guarantee. If you are doing time management then if your task is left unfinished for any reason you then need to try to find time to finish it. Your mind flops from task to time and then tries to find more time. In time management the option is to find more time because that is what you are managing (unless you have a 20 page manifesto with all sorts of exceptions for different circumstances). This is probably where most people give up on time management as being too hard for them.

If you are practicing task management then in the same situation your task is left unfinished so you manage the task. Your options are to quickly tidy the task up and call it finished, realise it is not important so just drop it all together, leave it for now and move onto the next task, or adjust the allocation of time associated with that task. You have more options and it just seems to flow more intuitively because you are managing something that you actually have control over – the tasks.

The difference in the input might be subtle but the difference in outcomes might be significant.

I can’t write more, I’ve run out of time.

Posted in Behaviour | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Who do you think you are?

Well?  Just who do you think you are?

It sounds like a simple question but is it?  You can give me your name or occupation or any number of “things” that describe you but that isn’t really “you” it’s just a label you wear for identification.  The label lets me know how to treat you or which box I should put you in.  But the label can never be you.

Oils made to match your aura colour

So who are you?  Where do you start and finish?  If you cut off your finger is it still you?  If you sew it back on is it a part of you again?  Where do you draw the line?  What about the billions of dead skin cells you shed all the time, are they still you?

Where does your influence end – well this is an easy one – it is infinite.  You affect everything in the universe and everything in the universe affects you, even things that don’t exist any more.  What?  You don’t believe me!  What about gravity?  Your gravitational field extends out to infinity and you are influenced by everything that exists.

So now we know for certain that your infuence extends to everything in existence and you are also influenced by everything that exists do you think it is possible that this can happen for more than just gravity?

Or for that matter how many of you are there?  No, I don’t think you have multiple personality disorder but it is a fair question: How many of you are there?

Go with me on this for a while to see where we end up…

There is a thing called observation (or perception or awareness but for this post I’ll stick with observation) where there is an observer and the observed and the act of observation.  If any one of these three parts is missing then there cannot be any observation.  If you look at a flower then both you and the flower must exist, and if you don’t look at it (the act of observation) then there is no observation.  All three are essential for observation.

Plenty of things are seen by your eyes but are not “observed” by your mind. If you look at a tree you don’t “observe” every single leaf in your consciousness even if every single one is seen by your eyes. Observation requires the act of observation, not just electrical impulses caused by light photons hitting your retina.

If you simply think of a flower in your mind (as you probably just did) then there is your mind (the observer), the created or remembered image of the flower (the observed) and the act of observing it with your mind.  I don’t think you would really say that the image of the flower “is” your mind.  It was created by your mind and then observed by your mind.

So far so good I hope, but how do you observe yourself?  If you are to do it physically you need a mirror.  Your eye cannot observe itself without some “thing” else acting as an intermediary.  You still need the three elements of observer, observed, and the act of observation.  Self-observation is not possible without an intermediary to reflect yourself to yourself.

So when you observe yourself mentally (as in self-awareness or consciousness) who is observing whom?  When you talk to yourself who is talking to whom and why would you do that if you already know what you are going to say if there is only one of you doing it?  How many of you are there?

If you really want to confuse yourself then what is happening when you observe yourself observing what you are thinking, or tell yourself to stop talking to yourself?

If you insist that there is only one of you, then what is the intermediary that reflects you to yourself so you can observe yourself?

If there is only one you and there is no intermediary then you must be a figment of your imagination and the “you” that is aware of you doesn’t really exist so it isn’t self-observation or self-awareness but a mental trick.  If that’s true then how can you know you so well and why do you sometimes surprise yourself (if you made yourself up then you should be totally predictable to you) and why talk to yourself?

Or maybe….

Just who do you think you are?

Posted in Awareness | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment