neuroscientits claim that we currently only use 10% of the brains potential

This is ridiculous and false.

I'm sorry, what I meant to say is:

"God claims that we currently only use 10% of the brains potential"

there. is that more believable now?

No, its even less believable now. Why not give us some solid references for these ridiculous claims you've made?

god said!!

you just have to have faith....

if you don't have faith you're pathetic!

Well as long as God says so it must be true..

your blind obedience is appreciated. now can I have some money?

@Merkaba, it seems that way, and the fact that it comes up as a google ad makes it seem like a scamish type of thing, but it does anything but complicate weight and fat loss. In a nutshell, JG explains how our bodies decide what they want. If we activate the F.A.T programs (famine and temperature), then our body wants to preserve fat to make us safe. These can be activated by a number of factors, such as stress, improper sleeping patterns, an emotional tie that fat=safe, mental reasons... he looks at all possible reasons our bodies would WANT to be fat, and helps eliminate them. He has a biochemistry background, and he goes in to the specifics of what takes place in our body when it goes in to starvation mode.

Like I said, I see it as the single best method of fat loss for PREVIOUSLY OR CURRENTLY FAT people. People who have struggled with weight, or currently struggle with it, and have a different relationship with food then most people. This is by no means a muscle gaining program, and is designed at overall health, fitness, and having a healthy relationship with food. Hardgainers, ectomorphs looking to gain some lbs of muscle, or douchebags like jmorrison are not who it is aimed at.

Belief is the death of intelligence? You mean to say that all beliefs that cannot be proven are anathema to any form of intelligent thought? The entire basis of scientific analysis is that of hypothesis, a "belief" in an idea or theory, and then doing research to prove or disprove it.

Obviously you have not researched your opinion (though that's the great thing about opinions, isnt it? no merit needed!), or else you would have found piles of evidence suggesting that meditation, prayer and hypnosis IS beneficial to many, many forms of therapy. The power of the subconscious mind is remarkable and those who capitalize on it, and try and understand and make it work for them instead of against them, are at an advantage.

There is also a large body of evidence supporting the idea that it is NOT just as simple as energy in energy out. Gary Taubes book Good calories, Bad Calories is a good counter to the "energy in, energy out" argument. There is a lot more to it then just that. I am not saying that the amount of calories you consume is unimportant, but there would be a signifigant chemical and hormonal differnece in your body if you consume 3500 calories of carbohydrate vs 3500 calories of fat and protein. Then again, you do not seem like much of a reader.

People who are not open to this will never benefit from it. The same people who scoff at people who meditate and find it wishy washy are often the people tensed up and honking the horn in the middle of a traffic jam. It is a beleif that benefits myself tremendously, as well as anyone who can accept the fact that our minds are incredibly powerful and capable of helping us achieve whatever we want.

Belief does not kill intelligence, ignorance does.

Energy in, Energy out. Take in less then you put out, and you lose weight. Everything beyond that is a story you made up to entertain yourself.

Read Good Calories, Bad Calories, or at least research it...

I haven't disagreed with you once.

I merely made the point that the methodology is inconsequential.

At the end of the day you can argue every variable, and create ever connection possible in defense of your position, but the truth is that things that operate within our physical reality operate based on a set of natural laws.

My opinion is that many people read to much into the methodology looking for some kind of "answer" to their problems when for most (barring actual biological impairments) it's as simple as eating less, and exercising more.

It's a simple as that.

I get the sequence of events, but you apparently don't.

Reason a Person is Fat + Fixing of this reason =/= skinny person

The equation is always as simple as

Person is fat + Eatingless/Workingout = skinny person

People are fat for a whole host of reasons. Many not because of any reason having to do with anything in the "Gabriel Method".

What then is their solution?

Oh yeah, the same as everyone else, eat less, exercise MOAR.

The method of weight loss is easy to understand, but practicing it is often not..

In advance - TL;DR

I agree, but it's also important for me to offer at least an alternative perspective on the matter, and to back said alternative with sound logic and empirical evidence.

Basically, my assertion has been that most psychological disorders behave in like but to varying degrees when influenced by external and internal catalyst.

Yoga,Prayer,Meditation,Hypnosis,Talk Therapy are methodologies which employ both in the hope of coming to a more let say... sane perspective.

Often the initiation of this process is something of a more superficial nature such as wanting to lose weight, wanting to quit smoking, wanting to stop drinking or drugs, wanting to stop feeling depressed.

All expressions of more base problems within a person. Oral fixation, repressed trauma, etc.

While causality certainly plays a role here I think the "Gabriel Method" is exactly what I said from the start - brainwashing. Throw in some voodoo reasoning, mix in some psychoanalytical technique, and then let people do what they already know how to do which is eat less and exercise more and then claim supreme understanding. Solid technique - works well on dummies I bet.

That being said -

I would also say that their is no such thing in my opinion as an objective reality apart from the observer.

As it is impossible for anything within the Universe to get outside of the Universe so as to look back at the Universe I find it very unlikely that any person at any level of consciousness can say that they have a way of quantifying an objective reality.

Therefore, I agree that everyone is stuck within their own subjective perspective influenced in part by nature and nurture, but that doesn't preclude one perspective from not being wider than the other.

We often think of some of the more ignorant people we meet as narrow-minded, and having "tunnel vision", but in reality we all have tunnel vision. Some more so, some less so.

I also agree that changing someone's beliefs by attempting to change their logic and reasoning has been proven to be futile. The alternative method is of course long term degradation of their belief system (which happens naturally, as people are apt to change dramatically over the course of their lives), but that would be an abuse of the person in what could be the worst possible way. There is much unforeseen consequence in tampering with another persons base psyche without proper instruction from a trusted individual who is giving personal care to each individuals specific case.

I don't see that in this case at all, and it's kind of disturbing.

I understand that it is really impossible to see an objective world in isolation. The only consciousness we've ever known is our own, we don't know what the physical world exists like outside ourselves. Therefore we can only quantify it with our personal scope.

However, there is a relative objective reality that exists with everyone's personal scope, regardless of semantic or perceptual differences. Gravity effects us all, water is always two hydrogen and an oxygen. I know you are aware of this, but I am rounding off my point. I never implied that we can have "the eye of god" when it comes to knowing reality.

But yes, I agree we only know what we can sense, or build things to sense, we can unlikely know what the universe exists as ultimately.

And yes, I agree we are all subjects of our own biases, of course.

I also agree that drinking the kool-aid and subscribing to a guru is not healthy. People need to trek the hard and lonely road in developing beliefs individually and not have someone impress their own fantasy world upon them. People submit their skepticism far too easily when it comes to dieting and training.

The phenomena still exists though, people's motivations and emotions can be largely shaped by seemingly meaningless rituals and practices. It is something worth looking into rather than ignoring as mere ignorance or superstition.

BTW, what does TL;DR stand for?

Too Long, Don't Read!

I agree that it's something worth looking into. In fact it's the entire reason for my posting.

Belief is ignorance in action. Belief is the death of intelligence. I know my post may seem roundabout, but that's only because the first couple of post I made in this thread were succinct and to the point of what I had to say.

"All phenomena are real in some sense, unreal in some sense, meaningless in some sense, real and meaningless in some sense, unreal and meaningless in some sense, and real and unreal and meaningless in some sense." - R.A.W.

Anyway, I diverge. Losing weight is important for people who are unhealthy due to their weight. This at least we can agree on. Whatever is necessary to that end is fine I suppose as long as it doesn't harm others.

"Belief is ignorance in action. Belief is the death of intelligent."

I agree in a large sense, but I believe it would be better understood if expounded upon further. I think those phrases can sound a bit chauvinistic without more explanation of their meanings.

Belief, as a mechanism of terminal understanding, is ignorance in action. Meaning, the moment you stop further investigations because you think you have it all figured out, is the moment intelligence and critical thinking goes into submission.

Ok, I'm done!

Calories in versus calories out!!! I'm going to go eat a cookie now.

neuroscientits claim that we currently only use 10% of the brains potential

You hit the nail on the head. I could have and would be willing to expound further, but I mean...it's a internet bodybuilding forum so...yeah.

Explaining the failings of semantics and symbols with semantics and symbols is difficult to say the least, but it's the only avenue available.

The map is not the territory.

Today's christians are averaging 5% use of their brains while catholics are still down to 2%..

The map is not the territory.

Nice metaphor, I haven't heard that before.

that one?

its nlp, Neuro-linguistic programming, crazy shit, check it out

Neuro-linguistic programming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why must I have 20 post to send a message to other users besides mods and also to post links?

It's not NLP, but plays a part in it, and NLP what in part was got me interested in General Semantics.

Fufu - well anyway - thought I'd throw some names at you for lite reading purposes.

Much of what I've said in the thread has been derived solely from these two gentleman. Wiki will bring up a wealth of information on both, but more importantly I think is Korzybski's work on General Semantics of which both were students. You'll find that linked shortly into Korzybski's wikipedia page.


The map is not the territory. - Alfred Korzybski


“I don't believe anything I write or say. I regard belief as a form of brain damage, the death of intelligence, the fracture of creativity, the atrophy of imagination. I have opinions but no Belief System (B.S.)” - Robert Anton Wilson

I am not here to argue ideology. If you are not open to it, I am perfectly ok with that. It does not affect my reality in any way. I am merely illuminating this method and book for those who may gain from it.

I am a fan and believer of subjectivity. While I do believe in an objective universe of simultaneous consciousness, I practice a subjective view. As in, if a belief benefits me i.e the belief that I can program my brain to want to be fit, the belief in the law of attraction, belief I am destined to be successful, etc. I do not care if anyone questions or tries to disprove any of them, for their input is irrelevant to me. I am also not stuck with beliefs; for a long time I believed in the Christian religion until it became detrimental to me, so I shed it and developed new ones.

For anyone open to new ideas, new methodologies, and ideas like the law of attraction, the idea behind The Gabriel Method is an invaluable resource.

Also, way to steal those quotes, I thought they were original lol. For a moment I thought you were being profound.

In addition to what Charter has stated -

There is a phrase I often tell myself - "Anyone can convince themselves that anything is real, no matter how ridiculous it may seem. Anything within the realm of mental conception can become real if the individual so wishes. "

I try to keep that in the back of my mind at all times. In practical terms, we humans naturally judge things as black or white, good or bad. It makes things easier, we don't like to be unsure. We would rather ignore the unknown and create a user-based reality.

The other side of the coin is accepting the unknown; accepting that it is everywhere and everything. Like Charter said, "I don't know", "we'll see", or "maybe". I believe that is the heart of science and understanding. Is is of the same character as Socratic belief, "I know that I know nothing".

The problem with accepting the unknown is the mental incongruity. Accepting the unknown often brings people into a feeling of chaos and instability. But I think perhaps living in the world of instability will bring a person closest to the "reality" of life than anything else.

I'm not directly responding to anything specific, but just the general subject presented in this thread. I am not arguing good or bad, or right or wrong.

For sure. I subscribe to non-aristotelian logic, but that's merely as a means of widening my own personal perspective.

I would say to your analogy that there are not in fact two-sides of the coin, and if there are it's only because we the observer have invented said sides.

Accepting the unknown becomes easy when we realize that nothing is known period, and only taken for granted.

I try to remain in the moment, and tell myself that all perception is gamble.

It's a crap-shoot, and if anyone says they have the answers then they're probably full of shit.

In the end there is no substitute for experience. Limit your mind, limit your body, limit your experience. Experience is all the we have in life. Different experiences - some viewed subjectively as bad or good, but in the end all that we know that we have is experiences. Engage yourself fully in the moment.

I don't think that any man has learned the truth, but many men have experienced it.

Yes, a creation of the observer, but one with very real and wide-spread implications. I think my phrasing was suitable.

The notion of "the creation of the observer", while true to me, can be taken so far that it practically breaks down all attempts to describe things literally into complete absurdity. That is why it is a tough idea to throw into an argument, as I see it. I agree with it, but when the notion of contrivance is itself described through the fabrication of spoken and written word, the meaning is largely lost, or just compounded into a mind-fuck.

We just have to hope somebody gets what the other is saying when ideas are put through their own mental filters. Even harder when done over a forum. I like the way you think, though.