Best self-help books?

placidranger said:Does the moon exist if nobody is looking at it? 🙂
unknown:

No, this isn't an issue of interpretation; it's the entire point of the thought experiment. The question is whether the cat is dead or alive before we look—or at the exact moment we observe it—or if there’s even a cat at all when there's no observer present. 😉

The Copenhagen (or is it Copenhagen? 🙂 ) interpretation is the standard way people wrap their heads around quantum mechanics.
Critics have pointed out various paradoxes arising from it—using a cat, the moon, or an electron as a metaphor—which sparks plenty of debate. But nowhere does anyone suggest that "consciousness" itself is the trigger; it’s the measurement.

To get back to the main point: self-help gurus love to peddle the idea that quantum mechanics proves you can manifest reality through sheer willpower. It’s nonsense. There is zero scientific basis for it.
What would happen if you dared one of those gurus to jump off a skyscraper and try to "manifest" not hitting the pavement? 😁

amberbadger8 said:If you actually want to understand how thoughts might influence reality, you need to step outside your own narrow perspective. By engaging in shallow reasoning and tossing all self-help literature into the same bin as stage magic and cheap parlor tricks, you’re only distancing yourself from the truth.
The reality is far more subtle, yet somehow incredibly simple in certain aspects. You’ll find it easier to experience or grasp intuitively than to explain via math or physics. But again, I'm telling you to be more precise. I don't know what's bothering you—whether it's telekinesis, levitation, meditation, positive thinking, autosuggestion, or the power of the subconscious...
Claiming the subconscious isn't a form of existence is essentially the same as denying the existence of the soul.
It's a denial of our essential being.

By oversimplifying this and grouping self-help books with stage magic or cheap parlor tricks, you’re just missing the point entirely.
The reality is much more subtle—and yet, in certain ways, incredibly simple. It's easier to experience or grasp intuitively than it is to explain through math or physics.
But again, I need you to be specific. I don't know what you're actually getting hung up on—is it telekinesis, levitation, meditation, positive thinking, autosuggestion, or the power of the subconscious?...

Claiming the subconscious isn't a form of existence is essentially the same as denying the existence of the soul
as our essential self.

amberbadger8 said:Don't bother looking for answers in quantum mechanics. It’s far too ambitious for the 21st century. What actually matters is understanding the human psyche—how it dictates our health, our environment, our families, and our friends. It's about the weight of our choices, both good and bad, and how those decisions ultimately shape the reality we live in. If you want to make sense of things, do yourself a favor: pick up some psychology books and start there. Study that instead. It might actually give you some clarity. 👍

William Hernandez14 said:I need to weigh in—I’ve read a mountain of self-help books over the last fifteen years. Believe me, they're everywhere. I've dealt with panic disorder since I was a kid. Some of that rigid theory helped, but more often than not, it just made things worse. I ended up stuck in this strange loop, losing my mind trying to reconcile all their contradictions. For me, the real fix was staying busy through work or any kind of physical activity. Not everyone is built to be a psychological experiment. Rationalization is what matters most. Just face it without making it more complicated than it needs to be.

placidranger said:I think you completely misread what I was getting at.
I’m not looking for answers in quantum mechanics—my point is simply that people trying to back up their theories about having "fantastic powers" to control reality are doing a pretty terrible job of it.
As for the rest of your post, I have no comment. I honestly can't see why you felt the need to write it.

amberbadger8 said:There's your answer. I'm telling you that if you want to understand how thought influences reality, stop looking at quantum mechanics and look elsewhere—and I've already told you where.👍

placidranger said:I'm listening. Explain.

By oversimplifying this and grouping self-help books with stage magic or cheap parlor tricks, you’re just missing the point entirely.
The reality is much more subtle—and yet, in certain ways, incredibly simple. It's easier to experience or grasp intuitively than it is to explain through math or physics.
But again, I need you to be specific. I don't know what you're actually getting hung up on—is it telekinesis, levitation, meditation, positive thinking, autosuggestion, or the power of the subconscious?...

The Law of Attraction, all its various iterations, the mystification of the subconscious, dragging quantum mechanics into it... it's all fluff in the self-help industry. It sounds great, but there's no substance behind it, and it just offers false hope.

Claiming the subconscious isn't a form of existence is essentially the same as denying the existence of the soul
as our essential self.

I'm not saying the subconscious "doesn't exist." I'm saying it's imprecise to call it a "form of existence."
Bringing the concept of the soul into this is irrelevant unless you intend to prove it somehow influences reality—and even then, you'd have to prove the soul exists first, which is a tall order.

placidranger said:I didn't even ask for it. 🤷
Either you missed my point entirely or you didn't bother reading what I actually wrote. Let’s be clear—it’s indirect. Through our actions—obviously—they influence reality, life, and the people around us, but it isn't that direct, immediate impact people like to claim.

placidranger said:Does the moon exist if nobody is looking at it? 🙂
unknown:

No, this isn't an issue of interpretation; it's the entire point of the thought experiment. The question is whether the cat is dead or alive before we look—or at the exact moment we observe it—or if there’s even a cat at all when there's no observer present. 😉

The Copenhagen (or is it Copenhagen? 🙂 ) interpretation is the standard way people wrap their heads around quantum mechanics.
Critics have pointed out various paradoxes arising from it—using a cat, the moon, or an electron as a metaphor—which sparks plenty of debate. But nowhere does anyone suggest that "consciousness" itself is the trigger; it’s the measurement.

To get back to the main point: self-help gurus love to peddle the idea that quantum mechanics proves you can manifest reality through sheer willpower. It’s nonsense. There is zero scientific basis for it.
What would happen if you dared one of those gurus to jump off a skyscraper and try to "manifest" not hitting the pavement? 😁

The Copenhagen interpretation—or whatever the standard terminology is 🙂—is the accepted way we view quantum mechanics.
Critics of that interpretation have pointed out several paradoxes resulting from it. Whether you use a cat, the moon, or an electron as an illustration, it sparks massive debate. However, the question is never actually about "consciousness" influencing them; it is strictly about the act of measurement.

To get back to the point, self-help gurus try to peddle this narrative that quantum mechanics proves thoughts can manifest reality, which is completely baseless.
What would happen if you dared one of them to jump off a skyscraper and tried to use their thoughts to prevent hitting the pavement? 😁

electrictiger70 said:I honestly don't know if it does. There is evidence that it exists, 😉 but my take is that it doesn't really matter whether it exists when there isn't anyone there to witness it... essentially, if there is no consciousness observing it, then it doesn't exist...

The Copenhagen interpretation—or whatever the standard terminology is 🙂—is the accepted way we view quantum mechanics.
Critics of that interpretation have pointed out several paradoxes resulting from it. Whether you use a cat, the moon, or an electron as an illustration, it sparks massive debate. However, the question is never actually about "consciousness" influencing them; it is strictly about the act of measurement.

To get back to the point, self-help gurus try to peddle this narrative that quantum mechanics proves thoughts can manifest reality, which is completely baseless.
What would happen if you dared one of them to jump off a skyscraper and tried to use their thoughts to prevent hitting the pavement? 😁

Look, I am not just talking about self-help gurus. And that whole connection between quantum physics and the self-help industry cannot be generalized so broadly as "gurus claim quantum mechanics proves thoughts affect reality"—because there are countless different claims and many different types of gurus out there. You need to be more specific. ☕

Gary James88 said:http://www.forum.com/showthread.php?t=285149

placidranger said:👍

on that note, got any book or author recommendations?

electrictiger70 said:Thanks. It’s an interesting discussion, but I’m a bit lost here—what exactly are you trying to get at? I skimmed the first page, but there is no way I am sitting through a twelve-page thread just to find out that, following the usual patterns on American forums, nothing meaningful was actually concluded...

Gary James88 said:This is honestly one of the better threads on this site. You've got experts from all over—philosophy, physics, math, social sciences—alongside regular people who just find the topic fascinating. It tackles whether the moon actually exists when we aren't looking at it (which is really just a question about how much an observer affects reality). Honestly, you won't find a better answer than the ones posted here, and I think Apex was actually pointing you toward this specific debate when they asked you about the moon a few posts back. For what it's worth, the whole thing runs about 38 pages long. 😁

electrictiger70 said:I honestly don't know if it does. There is evidence that it exists, 😉 but my take is that it doesn't really matter whether it exists when there isn't anyone there to witness it... essentially, if there is no consciousness observing it, then it doesn't exist...

The Copenhagen interpretation—or whatever the standard terminology is 🙂—is the accepted way we view quantum mechanics.
Critics of that interpretation have pointed out several paradoxes resulting from it. Whether you use a cat, the moon, or an electron as an illustration, it sparks massive debate. However, the question is never actually about "consciousness" influencing them; it is strictly about the act of measurement.

To get back to the point, self-help gurus try to peddle this narrative that quantum mechanics proves thoughts can manifest reality, which is completely baseless.
What would happen if you dared one of them to jump off a skyscraper and tried to use their thoughts to prevent hitting the pavement? 😁

Look, I am not just talking about self-help gurus. And that whole connection between quantum physics and the self-help industry cannot be generalized so broadly as "gurus claim quantum mechanics proves thoughts affect reality"—because there are countless different claims and many different types of gurus out there. You need to be more specific. ☕

I'm not talking about self-help gurus, and that whole connection between quantum physics and self-help can't really be generalized like "self-help gurus try to sell the idea that quantum mechanics proves thoughts can shape reality"—there are too many different claims and different types of gurus. Be more specific ☕

placidranger said:As Gary James88 mentioned—there are massive debates about this, far beyond just some internet forum. It's a much broader conversation. Again, we aren't actually talking about the moon here; it's a metaphor for incredibly minute particles 🙂 it's less about consciousness and more about the mechanics of measurement.

I think our influence is limited to our own perception of reality—essentially, changing our perspective. It's about consciously defining the quality of the things and concepts surrounding us. The real question isn't whether a glass of water exists, but whether it's half full or half empty; whether the world feels welcoming or like a combat zone; whether we take responsibility for what happens to us or hunt for external excuses; whether we take risks or play it safe; optimism versus pessimism...

I'm not talking about self-help gurus, and that whole connection between quantum physics and self-help can't really be generalized like "self-help gurus try to sell the idea that quantum mechanics proves thoughts can shape reality"—there are too many different claims and different types of gurus. Be more specific ☕

It can be generalized—there are plenty of them. "Quantum" has become a buzzword slapped onto almost any nonsense found in New Age self-help books. The first names that come to mind are Chopra, Dyer, the people behind D Sikret, and the folks behind that pseudo-documentary What do Bleep do WE know... plus the endless horde of clones following suit.

I think it’s fair to generalize, as there are plenty of them. "Quantum" has become a lazy adjective tossed onto almost any nonsense you see in the endless sea of New Age self-help books. The first names that come to mind are certainly Chopra, Dyer, the folks behind D Sikret, and even the people involved with that pseudo-documentary What do Bleep do WE know... along with a whole horde of similar types.

electrictiger70 said:That is precisely my point. This implies that consciousness is the core variable here, not just some matter of objective measurement. 😉

I think it’s fair to generalize, as there are plenty of them. "Quantum" has become a lazy adjective tossed onto almost any nonsense you see in the endless sea of New Age self-help books. The first names that come to mind are certainly Chopra, Dyer, the folks behind D Sikret, and even the people involved with that pseudo-documentary What do Bleep do WE know... along with a whole horde of similar types.

Look—What do Bleep do WE know is basically a wannabe cult 🤣. Let’s try to maintain some level of intellectual standards in this discussion 😁. When I refer to self-help, I am thinking of something entirely different from that genre. 😉

Look—What do Bleep do WE know is basically just a wannabe cult🤣—let's try to maintain some level of intellectual standards here😁—when I talk about "self-help," I'm referring to something else entirely. 😉

placidranger said:I’m not entirely sure what you're getting at here.

Look—What do Bleep do WE know is basically just a wannabe cult🤣—let's try to maintain some level of intellectual standards here😁—when I talk about "self-help," I'm referring to something else entirely. 😉

Sure... but it’s incredibly popular, much like D Sikret and those other tropes. Whether they intend to or not, they market it as self-help.
I haven't encountered a single coherent argument linking quantum physics to consciousness yet.