If you are only looking at it from the level of physical reality how would you know that?

You cannot possibly know except from your limited point of view. And since you are probably an atheist, (or just pragmatic) you don't go any further than that.

So I cannot argue your point from this level, I can only disagree with you.

I cannot prove purpose or reason or intention in connection to this event because that would all come from a different level of consciousness and it would only get into unprovable belief systems.

So from your point of view you are correct. From mine, you are mistaken.

But the CAUSE for the interaction itself is place and time. They were in the same place and same time.

That is the cause.

Because we live in the same reality actuality, and events happen and over lap, there can be no closed systems.

The cause for the interaction is that the man and the coconut, by some causes ended up being at the same place at the same time. That is the final cause.

It is a combination of causes that come together in a universe where we happen to share space and time with others.

My assertion is that every event has cause. You have not disproved that statement with this example.

The thing that makes events overlap is that they all happen in the same space-time reality.

Space and time:

If I stood in the middle of the highway at night when hundreds of trucks speed through our town, I would probably be hit by one of them.

If I stood on a deserted road where there was no traffic, I probably would not be hit by a truck.

My actions and the actions of a truck driver are not connected. Yet what is connected is the universe of space and time that we share.

If I choose (knowing or unknowingly) a place and time where I can get hit by a truck, I will likely be hit by a truck.

If a truck is going down the road and a person is standing there in the dark he is likely to hit them.

They are not connected. But the event is connected by space and time, which we share.

I would agree with you on spiritual grounds Jeannie.

We could invoke the concept of a guardian angel, or faery and suggest that these conscious spirits have intervened in some way to either cause these types of events or prevent them. This would amount to a faith-based belief that is totally unprovable without being able to directly detect these spiritual beings.

However, a supposed "Law of Attraction" that is like a standard law of physics runs into a huge problem here.

It seems to be easy to apply it to a single person, because we can imagine that one person being affected by the law of attraction.

But now if we replace the coconut with a tsunami that wipes out a huge mass of people it becomes ludicous to believe that all of those people attracted that same single event to themselves.

This is where I feel that the "Law of Attraction" must either break-down completely, or at the very least to salvage it we must accept that we do not attract everything that happen to us. Potentially we can attract some things, but we aren't responsible for attracting everything that happens to us.

In some cases we are simply innocent victims.

The "Law of Attraction" cannot be an absolute across the board.

And we already know that we can attract or repel certain relationships. So some level of a 'law of attraction' is always in effect in that sense.

We make ourselve look good, smell good, and act good, to attract a mate, for example. Then after we marry them we smother them with our B.O.

Strange I have never been a victim of a tsunami. I guess it is because I don't live where tsunami's happen. I guess I'm just lucky then.

The law of attraction does not break down. It is just hard to believe.
We would rather believe in innocent victims. It makes us feel better.

Like I have said before, when we incarnated to this earth we were made aware of the dangers of tsunami's and floods, and famines, and all manner of dangerous things that might happen in our lives. We came anyway.

People go skiing knowing that they could be buried in an avalanche. They go sky diving and mountain climbing knowing that it could be dangerous. People drive their cars knowing that one mistake and bam!! you are dead or crippled for life.

People take chances, people go places and do things, and walk under coconut trees, all the while accepting the responsibility of what might happen to them. I drive my car knowing that I could get into an accident and be killed or injured.

I take the chance anyway. And if I have an accident I don't go crying that I am an innocent victim. I take responsibility for my actions.

Except maybe in court and I might lie like hell. Kidding.

Well everything you've stated here is just standard common sense and doesn't require any belief in any special Law of Attraction as you require it to be.

You require that we attract everything to us that happens to us.

Therefore if you are sitting in your house watching TV and some drunk loses control of his car and drives into your living room and kills you then you attracted that!

That's what you are require in your "Law of Attraction".

Otherwise, the whole term would be meaningless and all you'd be talking about is the same common sense that eveyone already has. There would be no need to call it "The Law of Attraction".

Just call it the "Law of Common Sense" and be done with it.

You are not making any sense. You have to get outside your box.

Of course there are individual causes within the sets, that is not in question.

What is the cause of the interaction?

What single cause ties those two separate events together? There is none. The interaction itself is an event without a cause. This is clearly displayed if one removes either of the two, the other unfolds without difference. This is so because they are independent sets of circumstances(closed systems).

Both sets of events were independently set in motion, and would continue unfolding without the other, because neither set has a shared cause. Any single cause within either set has nothing to with the other.

The interaction is an event without cause. No single nor combination of causes contained within the sets has any affect on the other without the interaction. There are no more or less causes without the interaction than there are with it, therefore, the interaction itself is without cause.

Remove it and nothing changes except the time of the separate events.

Time is not a cause it is a descriptive term which define a spatial-temporal relationship of events.

It is the only thing which tie the two sets of events together.

Time is not a cause.

Based on the things you are saying now there would be absolutely no need to label it the "Law of Attraction".

In fact that would be totally misleading.

All you are talking about here is the "Law of Randomness and being in the wrong place at the wrong time by pure random ACCIDENT"

All you're saying is that if we take risks there's a greater chance we can be hurt.

Who would argue with that?

Why call that the "Law of Attraction"?

That's nonsense.

Just call it the "Law of Taking Risks"

Most people can easily understand this concept and would easily agree with it.

The law of this reality is that two objects cannot occupy the same place at the same time.

The man and the coconut attempted to break that law.

I guess then, the penalty was death.

My assertion was: All events have cause. My assertion holds true.

Here we have two events. A coconut falls from a tree, and a man walks under the tree. Each, as you say have separate cause.

Normally that is not a very big deal, except for the other law,

The man's head and the coconut cannot occupy the same place at the same time.

The cause of the man's death is that his head and the coconut attempted to occupy the same place at the same time.

THAT, (as A friend of mine used to say,) "was A BAD DECISION!"

Being at the wrong place at the wrong time is not random accident.
You choose where to be and when to be there.

That is CHOICE not random accident.

((( JB )))


Abra

just a howdy as i'm passing through

Hi Sharpshooter! How does one pass through a forum thread I wonder?

I was riding with a friend when we passed a terrible car accident. It was really gruesome.

He remarked: "That was a bad decision!"

I asked him, "What decision are you talking about, what do you mean?"

He said, "What ever decision he made that resulted in that happening."

He understood the law of attraction. Or at the very least the law of cause and effect. They are basically the same thing.

Its not that we attract "things" to us, but we are part of cause, always.

This assumes the guy actually gets hit on the noggen with the nut.

Just for the sake of playing the Devil's Advocate let's assume a slightly different scenario.

The guy is walking down the beach he approaches a coconut tree and for no rational reason he gets an odd intuitive feeling that something isn't right. Due to thie unexplained feeling he stop in his tracks momentarily to pause due to this strange inutitive feeling.

WHAM! The coconut lands on the sand two feet in front of him and scares the hell out of him.

Now what?

Where did that strange intuitive feeling of uneasiness come from? Was it just a coincidence?

What if this guy is used to this kind of thing happening in his life all the time? Lots of coincidences?

I believe in intuitive signals that come from seemingly nowhere because I'm one of the guys who has these 'coincidences' a lot.

Am I just extra sensitive to my surroundings? Did I subconsciously hear the coconut break off the branch, and that's what gave rise to my feeling of uneasiness?

It's hard to say.

Not that I've ever been around coconuts, but I'm just sticking with this example. Often times I just "sense" that something is wrong, and it often pans out. Am I getting peripheral feedback from my surroundings, or are the Faeries working their magick?

I have no clue. It could be either/or. Or maybe something else altogether. But I often have that 'sixth' sense concerning things of this nature. If I don't feel right about something, I've learned not to do it! Because my intuition has proven to be worthy of paying attention to.

Of course, this wouldn't support the Law of Attraction. This would be more supportive of some form of clairvoyancy or at the very least an ability to pick up on bad 'vibes' easily.

I'm not claiming to be clarivoyant by the way, especially not in the realm of being able to speak with spirit (yet). But I definitely have a good intuitive sense of which alleys not to go down.

I confess that some of that sense is 'common sense' but sometimes it's purely intuitive too.

Maybe it wasn't due to the driver's decisions at all. Maybe something horrible randomly broke on the car.

By the way, if you demand a cause for everything aren't you denying the very randomness of Quantum Mechanics that you so often appeal to?

You remind me of one of those people who will always use whatever best supports the moment.

If you demand that everything must have a cause, then aren't you just reverting back to Newtonian Determinism? Where would the law of attraction come into play then?

How could you possibly ATTRACT anything to you, if everything must be PREDETERMINED by CAUSE?

You're not even being consistent.

Howdy Sharpy.

I see you got the guitar in your lap.

Play us a tune, and upload it. We'll take a listen.

Why not? I assert that our subconscious minds know more than we do and if we listen to them, they will warn us of impending danger or doom.

People who stumble into 'accidents' could be people who refuse to listen to their intuition or that uneasy feeling.

I could have easily been a "innocent victim" when a man was hiding in the back seat of my car. But my subconscious mind got a clear message to me that he was there. I had no way of knowing except that I got the message in the form of my own voice in my head stating, "There is someone in my car!!" It was very strong and I could do nothing but repeat it out loud. I could not utter anything else!

the evelynne woodhead forum topic speed reading techniques,

I'll have to just pick, If I sang.... that might be member abuse