Comments on: Dr. Wayne Dyer: Living an Inspired Life http://stevengharms.com/dr-wayne-dyer-living-an-inspired-life My Blog Thu, 03 Nov 2011 16:27:12 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: person http://stevengharms.com/dr-wayne-dyer-living-an-inspired-life/comment-page-1#comment-264 person Mon, 28 Nov 2005 16:27:58 +0000 http://stevengharms.net/?p=566#comment-264 <p>Pardon my butting in, Shane, but it appears to me that your arguments--while philosophically well-grounded--fail to admit of the documented fact that perception does impact (not determine, but impact) reality. Various social sciences have observed that whether I believe I will be successful does affect my success. It doesn't alter physical surroundings or anything, but we are surrounded as completely by perception as we are by reality--and we can only experience the former through the latter.</p> Pardon my butting in, Shane, but it appears to me that your arguments—while philosophically well-grounded—fail to admit of the documented fact that perception does impact (not determine, but impact) reality. Various social sciences have observed that whether I believe I will be successful does affect my success. It doesn’t alter physical surroundings or anything, but we are surrounded as completely by perception as we are by reality—and we can only experience the former through the latter.

]]> By: shane http://stevengharms.com/dr-wayne-dyer-living-an-inspired-life/comment-page-1#comment-263 shane Thu, 24 Nov 2005 09:07:47 +0000 http://stevengharms.net/?p=566#comment-263 <p>Good to hear you made it out of your season of depression, those are quite crippling.</p> <p>Regarding Dr. Wayne Dyer, I have tuned into a couple of his PBS shows and here are my thoughts on his teaching:</p> <p>He is certainly a great communicator and teacher of his material, although he makes some claims and assertions that leave you with some apparent philosophical/logical contratidctions. Here are my thoughts and questions.</p> <p>To not prescribe clear personal attributes to this thing he calls "The Source" is quite pointless considering all his teaching hinges around it. Meaning if you can't define "The Source" how can you teach the fruit or the benefits of it. Steven, can you think of any real world analogies that parellel with this idea?</p> <p>To me it appears his belief stems from a flavor of deism which is odd because deism acknowledges the existence of a divine source but states it is unknowable and doesn't personally interact with the universe. So how can we benefit from it if we don't know it or can't interact with it?</p> <p>Another thing that was odd was his metaphysical ideas. He has zero proof that thinking positively will create realities. But if they could to what limit do they have? For instance I can positively think that gravity shall halt when jumping off a cliff and we both know that won't happen and it is absurd to think so. Positive thinking has no creative power in reality or in us.</p> <p>Lastly, for him to be oaky with someone "attributing properties of "The Source" to any personal divine identity is defunct. Here's why, a being is defined by what it is not what others think it is. For instance, I can apply attributes to you Steven that are in fact not consistent with who you really are. So, in common, it is not possible to just toss those attributes on any God without constradiction.</p> <p>Being that you have a love for philosophy and logic Steven, please let me know if you see the same contradictions.</p> Good to hear you made it out of your season of depression, those are quite crippling.

Regarding Dr. Wayne Dyer, I have tuned into a couple of his PBS shows and here are my thoughts on his teaching:

He is certainly a great communicator and teacher of his material, although he makes some claims and assertions that leave you with some apparent philosophical/logical contratidctions. Here are my thoughts and questions.

To not prescribe clear personal attributes to this thing he calls “The Source” is quite pointless considering all his teaching hinges around it. Meaning if you can’t define “The Source” how can you teach the fruit or the benefits of it. Steven, can you think of any real world analogies that parellel with this idea?

To me it appears his belief stems from a flavor of deism which is odd because deism acknowledges the existence of a divine source but states it is unknowable and doesn’t personally interact with the universe. So how can we benefit from it if we don’t know it or can’t interact with it?

Another thing that was odd was his metaphysical ideas. He has zero proof that thinking positively will create realities. But if they could to what limit do they have? For instance I can positively think that gravity shall halt when jumping off a cliff and we both know that won’t happen and it is absurd to think so. Positive thinking has no creative power in reality or in us.

Lastly, for him to be oaky with someone “attributing properties of “The Source” to any personal divine identity is defunct. Here’s why, a being is defined by what it is not what others think it is. For instance, I can apply attributes to you Steven that are in fact not consistent with who you really are. So, in common, it is not possible to just toss those attributes on any God without constradiction.

Being that you have a love for philosophy and logic Steven, please let me know if you see the same contradictions.

]]>