Announcement 1: The Secret Life Of Michael Ross

Steve,

Thanks for your additional thoughts.

Let me repeat...

1. I did NOT write down any goals.
2. I did Not write down nor create nor repeat any affirmations.
3. I did Not Visualize anything - I played no Mental Movies or whatever term you want to use to describe visualization.

As This is Intrinsic to The Secret, that I did not do them means I did not use The Secret. Plain and simple. The moment a so-called Law fails is the moment the Law is proven not to be a Law at all. And instead is proven just to be "Post hoc ergo propter hoc" (Post Hoc) a Logic Fallacy which assumes, A then B therefore A caused B.

Is it true that before a person can build a building they need to have a Thought? Yes. BUT, it is also true they they need to Breathe and Consume Nutrients.

Is it true that they create a Visual Aspect of their thought - either on paper or computer screen? Yes. But it is also true that they need to use a writing device to turn their thought into a two-dimensional aspect.

So using the above Post Hoc Logic Fallacy we could now create a new law...

1. You must breathe and consume nutrients.
2. You must have a writing implement.
3. This will give a building.

The Danger in the Secret is in Post Hoc Logic Fallacy. Where you are attributing Results to things that did nothing to actually bring about the result and then saying they are a Must Have / Law.

You can Think otherwise - and believe it at your core - but it doesn't change reality anymore than millions of people thinking the world was flat at their core made the world flat. The reality of a round world existed Despite their thinking otherwise.

Just because I think and then visualize and draw - and then act - to create a building, doesn't mean I need to Visualize/affirm/writedown goals/etc. for anything else. To think that - and thus think The Secret - is to fall for Post Hoc Logic Fallacy.

Just because Think (T), Visualize (V), Draw (D) then Act (A) = Building B...

T then V then D then A = B

Doesn't mean it applies to other areas. That I did what I did without all those steps is proof it it.

Now, there is Validity to Thinking and Acting and between is the Word. But these require a balance - Thought, Word, Action.

Too much thinking is daydreaming. Too much talking is Big Talk (I'm gonna do this and gonna do that and you know the drill). Too much action is a disaster as it's unfocused without the Thought to focus it.

Further, there is this...

Person A is seen to be going for a goal. It is noticed that they...

1. Think about it constantly
2. Have a cut out of the thing they are striving for and dream about it

Therefore, thinking about something and dreaming about something will equal Wanting the thing and natural Striving will take place. That is the wrong way. That is Affirming The Consequent another Logic Fallacy.

Wanting = thinking and dreaming and striving

Thinking and Dreaming /= Increased Wanting/Belief and Increased Striving

You can either accept the logic or you cannot. But "Having A Go" at me in your subtle - it's there but not directly at you - way doesn't change the reality.

If you want to Continue to Debate The Secret - or my Stance against it - then fine. But cut out the Digs which have no place in the debate.

Michael Ross