There was a time when this New Thought principle seemed so liberating. But then problems arose over what "thinking" actually entails. Does it include all our subconscious/automatic thoughts, the things that take place almost instantaneously beneath our threshold of awareness? I think most people's existences are conditioned by the self-sabotaging clash between what they say they want and what they inwardly fear.
Then again, what about the stream of trivial thoughts that continually loop through our minds--are we those? Meditation aims to quell these, so the answer is probably "no." In fact, most of what we take to be thinking isn't thinking at all. We are not in touch with the mental level where thoughts arise and we do not control them.
Finally, there is an equation between thought, an activity, and the state of Being. I don't trust that either. Is there nothing beyond thought? In routine life maybe not, since our 'thoughts' filter our experience and probably even create it. But as a spiritual principle, this is limited--though I admit, a lever on our functional life. Because of it's limiting nature, there's an apparently contradictory spiritual principle that "we are NOT what we think (that we are)." I think it's a matter of levels: in some ways it's true, and in other ways it's not.
Maybe not an exact match but I try to link it to the 'law of attraction'.
My psychologist friend called us 'law of attraction' people hippies but admitted he uses very similar 'principles' to get people to 'change' through changing thoughts and emotions.
I tried his way and yes I would say it is the same 'principle' and works pretty much the same way.
While there's a bit of "truth" to the "law of attraction" nonsense (think about something all day long, and that will influence how you act), no amount of thinking about things without an actual plan to accomplish/get them is going to get you anything.
For example, mormons can think about and wish for their "eternal families" all day every day -- but they're never going to get it. Ever. :)
One needs a good plan and also the 'goals' must be achievable ---- being an 'eternal family' is a good example of a bad goal unless one can define it in specific terms dealing with this life.
In all my years of Mormonism I didn't know any Mormon who practiced anything similar to 'law of attraction' the only exception was myself and at least my son was exposed, as a college-level athlete to some of the principles. I am not sure it helped him a lot but definitely 'appeared' to help some athletes on his team ----- or so they inferred. One also worked with my sports psychologist friend so he may have called what he did something else but it was basically the same principles, etc. involved.
I only read about, had an idea of what it was, but didn't really do much with it until this last year. Even though I believe I had some tangible benefits but I didn't track it that close.
It's hard to really track that accurately, but I think it helped me lose 80 pounds last year, helped improved my sports (skiing skill, multiple sports games won and shots/serving accuracy), financially, and helped me be more positive. However, I do not track these things 'religiously' just sort of 'in my head' and there are other factors (yes 'woo stuff' which is very closely associated) that aid these accomplishments also.
It would be interesting to see a study of how many people, exposed to these type of things, actually benefit. At least in sports they could use stats but there are normally many factors involved so what you end up with are athletes that 'bear their testimony' how they 'affirmed and thought' about some goal and achieved it ------ that was basically what my son was exposed to from past athletes.
What about the far less known aphorism? The one James Allen and Rene Descartes were afraid of everyone finding out.
A person thinketh only that which they think they can think.
Not that this is the case, but isn't it possible that a person is the sum of their experience and not the sum of their potential? And if a person is simply the sum of their experience wouldn't the only way to realize their potential be to transcend their experience? Thus to accept that I simply think and therefore am, would be to accept that I am not any more than what I am?
"Every man being conscious to himself that he thinks; and that which his mind is applied about whilst thinking being the ideas that are there, it is past doubt that men have in their minds several ideas,- such as are those expressed by the words whiteness, hardness, sweetness, thinking, motion, man, elephant, army, drunkenness, and others: it is in the first place then to be inquired, How he comes by them?"
I'm not near smart enough to understand Locke or Descartes. Hell, I'm not sure I'm smart enough to understand my self, but I may just be smart enough to understand that they both might be right.
Great art, like scientific invention, comes from this wellspring of being. Not only experience, but the potential to create more and be more than we already are by transcending to that place creativeness is born, and where imagination takes flight. So yeah, potential is more than the sum total of our parts and mere aspiration.
I know a guy who loved to watch downhill skiing and fantasized about flying down the slopes. The first time he strapped on a pair of skis, the ski instructor was amazed at how fast he picked it up.
Affirmations and/or Visualizations and feelings used in the 'law of attraction' and by psychologists can have significant effects. However, hard to 'scientifically prove' anything because so many factors can affect 'improved' performance.
In theory, the clearer you can see it and emotionally 'feel' and believe it the more likely you can have success.
I agree these techniques can work well ----- whether they work for everyone I doubt it, but work for many maybe.
And although you're right that it's difficult to demonstrate scientically a cause and effect relationship between visualization and performance (where *isn't* such a relationship difficult to demonstrate?), given the variable involved in "improved performance", the scientific demonstration of correlation is overwhelming.
Human, looking forward to witnessing the sub two-hour marathon
I can imagine that visualizing your trip down the slopes would be useful. I mean, as you are skiing, you are having to make a lot of fast decisions all at once the whole way down. If you've already planned out what you will do you'll have fewer decisions left to make, so you can concentrate on fewer things.
Does anyone here remember learning about "behavior therapy?" Change your behavior, and the thinking will follow to conform to the new learned behavior. That's for juvenile delinquents and social deviants who need to learn how to conform to the laws of society.
Only it isn't really all that successful, or we wouldn't have the highest concentration of incarcerated in the penal system, as a developed nation.
It only works if the person wants to get better, behaviorally speaking. Then there are those who may want to change, but for the life of themselves are unable to.
When David O. McKay was in charge, he cribbed a mantra (From Shakespeare, I think) that was preached at us young missionary skulls full of mush that is reflective of what you've stated:
"Whate'er thou art, act well thy part." Which was explained to us in the mission home, "maybe you're not the world's best missionary, but that doesn't stop you from acting the part!"
I thought this was awesome! I could keep on masturbating and then just act like I didn't!
It does have real world application, though. Acting like you know what you're doing is a staple of modern American living.
Behaviorism puts the effect before the cause. Tail wagging the dog. It can apparently "work" sometimes only because people (subjects) are so alienated from the workings of their own minds and have been taught (by their own bodily senses) to see 'reality' Out There, in the projected world of bodies and objects.
I think it's really the other way around. As a man does, so thinketh he. Mormonism knows this and that's why you have so many behaviors in Mormonism. Home teaching, scripture study, missions, testimony bearing, paying tithing, cleaning ward buildings, giving talks in church, family home evening, not smoking or drinking coffee, women covering their shoulders etc. etc.
The stuff Mormonism coerces its members to DO is what makes them think it's true. It's classical "cognitive dissonance" theory. The theory says that if your actions and your thoughts don't match you have "cognitive dissonance." And it further says, that the way you eliminate the "dissonance" is to change your thoughts to match your actions. That's why doing all the stuff builds testimonies in so many Mormons. That's why they say "test it by living it." That's why they say "a testimony is found in the bearing of it," (fake it until you make it etc.).
“It is our choices... that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities.”
J.K. Rowling is full of wisdom.
It's pretty much what Baura said. I could have the mind of a sociopath, but if I spend my life doing good deeds, it doesn't mean shit.
I think for most people, thoughts are powerful enough to become inclinations and eventually actions. It's just how you're made. I don't full agree with the whole 'if a man looketh upon a woman with lust he hath already committed adultery in his heart" thing. If a man looks at every woman he sees as a piece of ass, but is faithful to the day he dies, and is respectful to women, then does it really matter? It's just his shitty thoughts.
The thing is, I don't know if their are really people out there like that. Perhaps that's the genesis of the saying; the failures of those who have undisciplined thoughts.
What I do with my body is sort of the final output for what has been going on in my head. All day long I'm thinking about things and deciding about things I'll do or not do. What I finally decide to do is what you see.
"As a man thinketh" seems to imply to me that even if you think about doing bad things, it's practically the same as if you did them. I don't think that is fair, because those thoughts are the things you considered BEFORE you applied what you know and made your decision to reject them.
It's sort of like a factory that produces a product. There are constantly going to be flawed pieces that come down the line, but the factory has people or mechanisms that identify the flawed pieces and pull them out in time. We don't see the factory as being bad as long as they do a good job at quality control.