A Criticism of Steve Pavlina
I am going to do something here that I have never done before. I am going to criticize a major player on the internet. When I first read about Steve Pavlina, I read about the phenomenal growth of his blog. The amazing money he was making and I have to admit I was enthralled. I mean, here’s a guy who says he had huge debt and not much going for him, yet he found a way to turn his life around and become a huge success. Well who doesn’t want to learn from a guy like that?
So I read his blog. The articles are long. Longer than most people seem to be willing to read these days, yet he has a huge following. If you have a personal development blog, then Pavlina is THE MAN. He is the Darren Rowse, John Chow, and Daniel Scocco all rolled into one of personal development bloggers. The guy is making a ton of money and has an army of followers. And for a while I could understand that. He teaches you how to take control of yourself and do what needs to be done to succeed. That’s a worthwhile endeavor that truly helps people. But…
Lately he has been writing and doing things that frankly I find somewhat unsettling; even a bit disturbing. The first started a few months ago. He talked about wanting to “explore” polyamory. That means we wanted to be open to loving more than just one person at a time. Steve Pavlina talks about his “power” a lot, and he said that he and his wife were giving their power to an outside entity, that entity being the institution of marriage. So, he decided to take back his power which is just the personal development way of saying that he wanted to fool around. I guess framing it in terms of personal development makes it different from someone who just decides that he wants to fool around. Yeah, that must be why I am divorced, which is what this also led to. I didn’t just get my hormones in a bunch and make the biggest freakin’ mistake of my life. Nope. I was taking my personal power back. Who knew? At least I had the decency to suffer from some guilt.
The newest thing now is he’s talking about wanting to “explore” domination and submission. I know there are a lot of people that seem to enjoy this sort of behavior, and that’s fine if they are both into it, I suppose. But for Steve, it’s not enough to just be a bit kinky. His kinkiness must be justified in terms of having control of his power. In his latest post he talks a little about the S&M thing, but in surprising terms. He talks about pushing people’s buttons, and looking for more buttons he can push to “practice dominance over them.”
Steve Pavlina has established himself as an authority in the personal development field. He is evolving . It’s what he is evolving into that concerns me. Thousands of people listen to this man in the belief that he can show them how to become happier, more productive human beings. That’s a laudable goal. But it is my opinion that their leader is starting to lead them astray. We have all seen it before. Jim Jones started a Christian church, which became a cult where he could enjoy sex with whomever he cared to. I don’t remember reading anything like that in the Bible. It led to Jonestown where hundreds of his followers drank poisoned Koolaid in a mass act of suicide. Adolf Hitler led an entire nation astray. I am not saying that Steve Pavlina is anything like that. I am just saying care should be taken when exercising your personal power over other people is becoming like a new toy you enjoy playing with. So far, Steve Pavlina is an authority figure in personal development who wanted to fool around outside the marriage (and at least he was honest about it), and who now that he is free, wants to dominate other people in the bedroom. He also wants to dominate anyone who objects (what he terms “resistance”) to his personal desires.
I have a question. Doesn’t the pursuit of power need to be framed within a morality? I have another question. Is this really what personal development is supposed to be all about? Getting what you want, and learning how to control other people? I would have hoped for a worthier goal. A goal that improves a persons treatment of those around him, not a small, small goal of controlling other people to get what you want. Isn’t that what personal development is really supposed to be about?
As always, comments are encouraged.
.
Yes, the pursuit of power must always be framed within a morality? Everything we do should be. But, I don’t think having multiple partners is necessarily “immoral” – as long as the partners know and they too are OK with it.
On the idea of “exercising dominance,” it really depends what Pavlina means by this. I haven’t read any of his recent posts, but most females like men who are dominant, who lead, and show a better way. I imagine this is similar to what Steve means. As long as he isn’t doing anything against people’s will…I don’t think we can claim he is being immoral. Exercising dominance over others just means leadership, and personally I would rather be lead by a guy like Pavlina then a guy like Hitler.
But perhaps power corrupts, and absolutely power corrupts absolutely? You may have some fair concerns…but I will refrain from diving too far into them because I DON’T KNOW myself.
Steven | The Emotion Machine´s last blog ..The Uses And Abuses Of Setting Deadlines
Sorry, idk why I have a question mark at the end of the first sentence.
Steven | The Emotion Machine´s last blog ..The Uses And Abuses Of Setting Deadlines
Maybe I didn’t make myself clear. I’ll reread and edit if necessary. My point was that he enjoys pushing people’s buttons. He sees it as training his ability to use his power. I’m using his terms. I guess what I’m saying is that he enjoys manipulating the people around him. That can be a slippery slope. Apparently his wife didn’t like it so much. She sued for divorce.
I think it’s something I’ve been becoming worried about more recently in Steve’s posts.
For some reason the term “power” doesn’t sit well with me and when in the new year he opened up to his exploration of dominant and submissive roles I just didn’t really know where he was coming from.
He’s got a great following and he’s built it up from literally nothing which is an amazing achievement (I’d love to build up a following like his) .
Maybe I need to wait and see what happens next. An interesting discussion though Ray.
Pavlina has written some brilliant material even if his book is barely so-so, but what is happening to him is very weird indeed and he talks complete bollocks a lot of the time.
He recently told me because I was trying to giveaway 1,000,000 copies of my own book to people that couldn’t afford it, I didn’t put any value on it. WTF???
Don;t get me wrong, I think what Steve has accomplished in his like is quite extraordinary. There is no doubt that he is an impressive human being. I worry a bit though, that his values are becoming completely self-centered. He is in a position of power as an authority figure, and what he seems to be teaching now is that everything is okay as long as it makes you happy. That’s dangerous. To yourself and the people around you. Perhaps the thing to learn is not so much that anything goes as changing what makes you happy in the first place. I’m not sure it’s personal development when it’s learning to manipulate the people around you. That’s what grifters do. Con artists are masters of getting people to do what they want to make them happy (financially anyway). Steve is a self made man who I expect more from.
@Tim. First, thanks for visiting my blog, and welcome to the discussion. Your comment makes my point wonderfully. He has acquired a set of values that are completely self absorbed. He doesn’t seem to place value on people other than what they can do to make him happy. In a sense we are all like that. We all do that which makes us happy,but hopefully most of us also learn to take some happiness from helping our fellow beings. He seems to be missing that.
Bravo for trying to make your book more available.
I have just returned from visiting your site. What a treat. I’ll be spending a bit of time there. You have a lot to teach, and I have a lot to learn. Perfect combination.
I really liked Steve’s stuff when I was new to the personal development sphere and blogging in general … I read through a whole bunch of his earlier posts, and found them encouraging and inspiring.
His more recent stuff? Mmm. I don’t see eye to eye on Steve about a fair few things (mainly revolving around the fact he doesn’t have much time for Christianity or religion in general). I’m a bit torn between being, on the one hand, impressed by his open-ness and willingness to discuss quite controversial things … and, on the other hand, missing the old days of posts on topics which almost always delivered something useful.
There’s also part of me which thinks “Gosh, if this is where extreme personal development takes you, I’m not sure I wanna go there…”
Ali Hale´s last blog ..Struggling With Self Improvement?
@: I too found him inspiring and motivating, but the new what I will call a lack of morality for want of better terminology is faintly disturbing to me. I think that personally I need limits to my desire to please myself. My pleasure ends where it inflicts pain on another. I’m fairly sure I’m getting into philosophical areas I am not presently equipped to argue well, but they are just my opinions so…
There are many who see self-development as the exercise of power. They just don’t put it quite so bluntly. Nietzsche put it bluntly enough.
Embracing the dark side is difficult work. I don’t think Steve understands well enough what is needed frankly.
Polyamory is fine by me as long as everyone agrees.
Just to say you disagree doesn’t really demonstrate the immorality of Steve’s position.
It is possible to establish a unity from competing desires – the me that controls me and so on. I invite you to discover the elation this can bring.
I would agree that self-development is the exercise of power. It is called self-development however, and the power is that power that you exert over yourself. My objection is to Steve Pavlina’s crowing about his power and proving it by talking about his new found ability to push other people’s buttons. That’s his terminology. He talks about how much happiness it brings to him being able to manipulate people. His “experiment” in polyamory is, I think, nothing more than a midlife crisis couched in self-development terminology. I may be wrong, but I somehow doubt the children were consulted about their feelings about Dad’s newly discovered desire for more partners. I would hope that self-development authorities would strive for a higher moral ground. I understand your invitation to experience the elation that control over self can bring, but Mr. Pavlina is extolling the elation he feels from being able to manipulate other people. That makes him no better than a con artist. They’re simply more honest about it.
Evan, I really enjoyed your comment. It helped me to clarify some of my thoughts on the subject. Please return frequently and question me. I’m going to go now and take a gander at your site. I just know it’s going to be a great one.
I used to like Steve’s stuff in the past. Polyphasic sleep… polyamory… here’s a man who really lives the talk when it comes to life experiments!
To be honest I haven’t read his stuff in ages (I cut down on my information intake), but I don’t think the submission/dominance thing is necessarily bad.
I’ve known of a very happy couple in a healthy, mature sub/dom relationship. For them, it basically comes down to a relationship like between a dog and its master. The dom takes care of the sub in every respect, loves her (or him) very much, and never gives orders that would harm the sub. The sub surrenders, lets the dom make all the decisions, obeys the orders and enjoy that role.
Just because a lot of people are doing wrong doesn’t mean it can’t be done right.
Maybe that’s all Steve is doing. Just exploring that kind of relationship, without any megalomaniac need for power.
Vlad Dolezal´s last blog ..Say Hi on Facebook, (and a few more ways we can connect…)
Welcome to the discussion, Vlad. I wasn’t criticizing the fact that he’s experimenting with polyamory or the sub/dom thing. Well, the polyamory I was critical of, but only because of his domestic situation. It’s the taking pleasure in manipulating the people that are resistant to his wanting to try it. He basically says that learning to push people’s buttons is what makes him happy. I like my authority figures to be a little more developed spiritually and morally I guess. He is the one that set himself up as an authority, but it’s up to us as to whether we want to accept his authority or not. I’m just saying that with the new more petty sources of his joy, I am not at all sure I accept his authority any more.
Brother, Steve has no ‘power’ his readers do, this guy needs to wake up, maybe we should get Ray to go and tell him!
TheInfoPreneur´s last blog ..Why Your Comments Section Should Be Like A Forum
Ray,
You must have read my mind, I have a post about this sort of thing coming out today, infact right after this comment I’m going to edit you into it.
If Steve thinks he has ‘power’ he is an idiot. All these wars, all these corporate giants forcing the little guys out of business, all of this is the prolem with the world today.
I wish you could measure the pressure at which I am hitting these keys.
This is a fantastic post, Ray well done for doing this! I expect a lot of comments here.
TheInfoPreneur´s last blog ..Why Your Comments Section Should Be Like A Forum
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by TimBrownson, Ali Hale and Ben Lumley, topsy_top20k. topsy_top20k said: A Criticism of Steve Pavlina – http://theblog-log.net/a-criticism-of-steve-pavlina/ (via @http://twitter.com/theblog_log) [...]
Hi Ray,
I finally made my way over to your blog. Sorry about the delay. Where do I pay the fine?
I haven’t read Steve’s stuff for a long time but I admit his early stuff was brilliant. I think he’s moving from a personal development site into more of a philosophical site and that’s cool. He just may need to rebrand it in future if he keeps going down that path.
I hate the word moral because it’s so subjective, but I understand what you mean. I tend to take a pragmatic approach to personal development over a moral approach. That means I try to see what is good for everyone and look for win-win situations. I think it’s good for society if everyone makes willing sacrifices for other people and put others first. Selfishness is a huge problem in society.
I also don’t judge Steve’s polyamory thing. His wife apparently was open to it and they tried it and then got divorced. With the kids there it makes it so much more complicated because really they are the ones who lose out the most. It may have been better for Steve to sacrifice his yearnings until they hit twenty years old and were more mature to handle it.
Anyway, Ray. I’m glad to have got to your blog and have added you to my RSS reader. I’ll be back my friend.
Gordie´s last blog ..Personal Development By George Clooney: How Much Does Your Life Weigh?
@: James, calm down, my friend. Didn’t you read carefully? He’s all about manipulating people now. Don’t let him or people like him get to you. Remember that quite a bit of what he has published has been very helpful t0 his sheeple…errr..I mean people. `
@: Gordie. I’m really glad to see you here at last, my friend. I thought I caught a scent of the mysterious east when I awoke this morning.
It wasn’t so much the polyamory that got to me. (I’m sick of using that word, nobody talks that that way. Let’s just call it his screwing around. He only called it polyamory to make his mid-life crisis sound clinincal.) It was more the talking about how he was practicing how to dominate people. As much as I dislike his morality, I do agree with the principle he was explaining. He’s a bright guy, and pointing out to people that they shouldn’t let themselves throw up their own blockades to their self developmental progress was an enlightening article, but I really don’t need to hear about how much he is enjoying learning to manipulate people.
Anyway, I’m really glad to see you here, Gordie. Can’t wait to hear how much you like being back in New Zealand when you get there.
I’d not read either this site or the one you mentioned, until I was pointed in this post’s direction by James at theinfopreneur.net
I like how you take your own life story and disagree with Steve Pavlina’s choice of life.
Great article. I also share James’ comments above, the people with the power are the readers….
Thank you, Matthew. It’s good to see a familiar face here. I am aware of you from James’ site. I have been to yours a few times too. Community is a good thing.
Ray, it’s nice to see you expressing what you find uncomfortable about Pavlina. Many people would question their own views rather than consider the possibility that Pavlina could be wrong.
While I have benefited greatly from some of Pavlina’s articles and ideas, I am strongly opposed to his subjectivist views. If you believe that the people around you are a creation of your consciousness, it’s no surprise that you will mistreat them, especially if they resist your ideas (Pavlina has explicitly stated that people who disagree with him are simply part of him that are still uncomfortable with the evolution of his conscious outlook).
I don’t actually disagree with polyamory, in that I don’t think it’s necessarily immoral.
Where I stand, I can’t really tell whether Pavlina is justifying his attempts at fooling around, or that he genuinely believes that the lifestyle he’s leaning towards is more enlightened and consistent with his values.
What’s interesting about Pavlina’s lifestyle now is that it’s challenging the way we think about relationships. His views are so unconventional, it makes me think: Why do I think of relationships in the traditional sense? Could Pavlina be right? Why would it be wrong?
Makes you think, doesn’t it?
It does indeed. I agree that polyamory is not necessarily immoral, but it depends upon the context. Western culture, a wife and two kids would usually make screwing around, oops, excuse me, I meant to say polyamory, something considered taboo. I think relationships must be considered in the light of the culture in which they exist. They cannot be considered as a stand alone philosophical idea. Well, they can, but perhaps “should not be” would be a better way to put it. I think it highly unlikely that the children were sought out for their opinions or feelings in the matter, yet they are the ones that will be most affected. As you say, Haider, it does make you think.
I remember reading some of his stuff earlier. Haven’t been a follower or checked lately. Now I won’t be bothering. People are interesting but we have a big ability to go off the cliff, particularly when we think too highly of ourselves and that is usually when we stop listening. I guess that is what happened to Steve. It is sad but when you become a trailblazer, you don’t pay attention to the people in back of you even as you go off the cliff. Thanks for the heads up, Ray.
Ralph´s last blog ..Sunday Funnies – Brain Freeze
Glad to be of service, Ralph
oh oh.
I also can’t believe this Ray – Poly what?
I stopped frequenting Steve’s bog ever since i listened to a Spooky interview he and Erin – his wife had about seeing spirit bodies and stuffs.
Now I might just stop all together but before i do, i’d head in there to see for myself.
Cheers man good to see more comments
Olusegun´s last blog ..Broke-Ass Blogger or MSI Blogger – Which One Are You?
Hey there, Olusegun. I have got to head over to your blog and read that article. I love the title. But then, I think everyone should read your blog.
I’ve read a couple of his posts sometime back and it never really appealed to me, and now I’m glad I never went back. I thought at the time that he was a little weird and I can’t stand people who come up with an idea which is morally wrong and then try to argue their way around to make it right.
Sire´s last blog ..How Twitter Can Actually Earn You Some Cash
Wow. I remember Steve from a while back, stopped reading his posts though I can’t remember exactly why… Guess some people get a little strange once they’re being listened to.
I mean, I can Sort of see why you’d choose to frame it that way; being under pressure from people to be transparent, possibly excited about something new, possibly even fooling yourself. That’s not exactly right though, in my opinion.
That said, I guess he IS entitled to his own opinion on the internet and so on – though it does look like he’s gone a little… off.
@Sire: You have captured my point exactly.
@Heather: Hi , Heather. Yes, he’s entitled to his opinion, and we are entitled to call him on it.
Hmmm. I wonder if this is the guy I saw on Twitter a while back …I went to his website, kicked a few tires and generally liked what I saw. I was just about to signup to the newsletter and then I stumbled upon a video where he was saying that in order to be happy you’ve got to be THE MOST SELFISH PERSON IN THE WORLD or some such thing.
Now, I can be selfish. And a little self centered sometimes. But to go along with someone with a Gordon Gekkoish message like “Selfishness is Good” – well it just rubbed me the wrong way.
In fact, it repulsed me.
I never hit the submit button on the newsletter and I never returned to his blog (which is why I don’t know if this is the guy in question) but it sure fits the bill.
Jim Jones, Sun Yun Moon, David Koresh, Charles Manson and a whole host of others get to their position because they convince the masses that THEY are the object of one’s desire. They may start off with a message about “retreiving one’s power” or whatever but it is only a temporary detour until that power is assigned to “the leader”.
Watch out for this guy. From the sounds of it he has all the makings of a dangerous cult leader and in this economic climate he probably finds it very easy to find converts…
Good post, Ray! Important!
- Don
Don Power´s last blog ..Going Local – How do You Use Social Media to Boost Local Business?
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by TimBrownson: Rt @benlumley6 A Criticism of Steve Pavlina – http://theblog-log.net/a-criticism-of-steve-pavlina/...
Thanks, Don. I had a similar reaction to him. Nice to see you’ve dropped by.
Yeah definitely!@:
Ben´s last blog ..Be a beginner
I’m not sure how I feel about the direction that Steve P. is going. I do think the point he’s trying to make is that he gives 100% honesty in what he writes about.
I’ve read these posts too and he pretty much says that this is where he feels like his life his going. But I never got the feeling like he’s trying to push any sort of ideology on his readers.
Personally I couldn’t care less about S&M stuff. Not my cup of tea, so when he writes about it, I skip ahead or find something else to read.
Steve Scott Site´s last blog ..The Key to Success?
@Steve I wasn’t commenting on the fact of his new interests. I was more disturbed by his new fascination with manipulating people, and the joy exercising power over other people is giving him.
Steve says in his “How to make money from a blog” page that he now makes $1000 a DAY from his blog without selling anything. Does anyone else have trouble buying that claim? I don’t think anyone makes that much just from putting ads on a blog. And plus, rich people do not ever talk or brag about their riches. They prefer not to draw attention to it. What do you think?
Plus if you read his FAQ on his site, his answers sound immature and a bit egotistic, not spiritual at all.
Check out my site everyone: http://www.happierabroad.com
I think that a number of people on the web talk about their income. However, most of them are admittedly in the “make money online” field. I have no idea if Pavlina is being truthful or not. I have no way of judging. As to his spirituality, I would say his site is not so much about spirituality as it is about learning to master yourself. It is a self development site.
Ray´s last blog ..What I Learned From The PGA Tour Today
It is pretty easy to figure out. Steve is good at self discipline only if it benifits him. In other words he is a master of self indulgence!
Anybody playing the psychic card is playing with demons wether they are aware of it or not. Either that, or they are frauds.
The definition of marriage: A man and a woman who love each other and vow to spend the rest of their lives together. Each desiring their partners well being above themselves. An open marriage is not a marriage. It is some crazy mixed up vodoo, agreement or whatever but, not a marriage.
Steve’s biggest mistake is thinking that Jesus Christ is a mysic. No, Jesus Christ is GOD! GOD who humiliated himself to become a mere man in order to save our worthless hides. There is no higher consciousness, no universal mind. That is just man trying to become God, which is of course impossible. Thank God! The original sin. Man trying to become God and God, what does he do? He becomes a man. Jesus said if you want to follow me you have to deny yourself. Not indulge your every senseless wild fantasy. Not trying to contol people. Serving people. Putting others above yourself. Steve has it all wrong and it is going to kill him if he doesn’t get his act together.
@: @:
A polyamours marriage is a contradiction to me, but I dont think it is vodoo. I wrote a 1500 word post on why I think that so you can search it.
This i what I think steve means by pushing buttons. Its to challenge you and your own beliefs. Your do dead set that your right that it never occurs to you to look at yourself.
Personally, I don’t like Steves new material that much, but I love his older posts. So if you find value in his site like I do, stick around, If you dont, leave it.
He is a success for this reason that we are all talking about him. He says and does things that others wont touch and as such is handsomly rewared for it.
Iamdavid´s last blog ..How to Make The Most out of Being an Intovert
@:
James, have you read his site?
Iamdavid´s last blog ..Is Passion Really a Success Factor?
I saw a video of Pavlina recently (I’d only seen pictures before), and it enlightened me as to maybe why he’d go this route. To put it as nicely as I can, I doubt he got a lot of girls in high school. My guess is that there’s a whole lot of insecurity going on there. I’d love to see a post called “10 reasons why you should never date Steve Pavlina.”
Jacq Jolie´s last blog ..Catfight of the Personal Finance Blogger Chicks
LMAO
@: I stumbled across Pavlina’s blog by accident a couple of months ago, and was quite absorbed with it for a while. But as a natural skeptic, his posts began to have a phony ring. Cotton candy philosophy, coupled with a know-it-all smugness can do more harm than good. Also, his too clever marketing of his blog is manipulative in itself. I mean, who wouldn’t want to log on to it after reading that it is meant “for intelligent people”? Such is the stuff by which lemmings are led. Finally, to use his position to advocate his apparently amoral views is enough for me to suggest that his followers think critically . . . and for themselves.
I’ve been reading Steve’s blogs for about a month and a half now. Some of his early material is pretty insightful…however, my instincts are telling me that there is something slightly…off? There’s some kind of disconnect somewhere–even if it’s a very small one.
What I do definitely find off–if not also something to get me to question Steve’s credibility–is that his ex-wife, Erin, charges an astronomical amount for her readings. Now, I feel people have gifts that have a purpose to help other people in this world…but to charge THAT much to help someone really doesn’t sit well with me either. First of all, I myself have been through an experience where the person reading for me didn’t actually want to really help me, because I knew intuitively that the scale was tipped more for the money. And for Steve to stick up for her in justifying those prices–while at the same time doing the contrary on his site: By giving away his advice for free…hmmmmm….Just makes one think. Doesn’t it?
A wonderful friend of mine, Donna Reis, who is a chromatologist, a psychic aura reader, & whom also happened to paten the first non-programmable aura camera. She & I started a discussion over the phone one day on what the appropriate prices to charge somebody for a reading (ethically) should be. She told me that charging someone more than $150 for a reading is probably worshipping the almighty dollar, so to speak. Because to charge a price like $300-$1000 for a 30-60 min reading is just someone working from an egotistical point of view. Check her out: http://www.colorvibration.com/
Donna’s price’s I think are reasonable–especially for what you get with them.
But Erin’s prices…*shakes head* I would never spend that kind of money. Ever. I feel this whole “what you paid for is what you get” attitude to be very much stripped of humility. I understand the people doing readings for others have to put food on the table, pay bills, etc. but isn’t the true purpose to help people? With humility and understanding? I think there needs to be some balance between giving and receiving between the reader and the readee. Whatever that is is up to them.
Back to Steve though: I just…*sigh*…question his attitude towards self development & really helping people, like he says he strives to vs what’s in it for him personally. Especially in his current blog postings.
@E – Well you will pleased to know that not only does she charge an astronomical amount, but now is wanting an intern to work for her for FREE, because she can’t afford to hire someone “at this stage” due to both her and Steve not finalizing the divorce. So they can’t rack up expenses…which is totally contradictory to some of her posts, where both she and Steve are spending money on themselves.
@: Mixs: Exactly. Funny you bring this up. Steve has even stated in his blog that he’s received all this money from the six different streams of income on his blog–not to mention taken trips lately with that money he’s earned from his website.
I have also been observing his facebook page lately. He’s been saying stuff like “Filled up my dream car with dream gas, got a dream oil change and a dream cash wash, paid with imaginary money.” He’s probably just kidding there…but one example that’s caught me off has been this article: http://www.stevepavlina.com/blog/2010/08/subjective-relationships/
The language he’s using like: “I’ll simply dream that I get to read and digest your reactions to this as if you’d read it. But they won’t even be your reactions because there’s no you. I’ll simply be hearing the echoing projections of my own inner reactions to what I’m sharing with myself.”
Dude…I’m sorry, but it seems as if he’s losing a little touch with reality. :-\ And I don’t like to be the one to say this…but if he was really using the Law of Attraction in a healthy way, he wouldn’t be choosing words like this. It’s scary how far people can fall into something that’s merely supposed to be used as a tool from the universe to help you along. Because, my God! You still have to work for what you need/want in life. Things aren’t just handed to you.
Mr. Steve Pavlina is a self-centered immature quack. While he may be successful in business, that in no way translates to a decent human being. If you keep reshaping perspective and look for new ways to justify your actions, you could convince yourself that ANYTHING is acceptable… Very cult leader-ish.
Yeah yeah he has some good ideas, he might be an intelligent man, yeah, he also makes points here and there; whatever, I’m sure there are many CEOs that fit the profile for antisocial/sociopath whatever term we are going by these days.
Stevie-boy should stick to useful 30 day trials, productivity and development information, and leave that dream life, poly love, and wishy-washy cult leader/wise guru sex-fiend junk on a curb somewhere.
What started as a good thing, is rapidly de-evolving into utter trash.
~ Joshua