The Way of the Dotts

Richard Dotts is an author who writes on the meditative (non-)mindset aspect of manifestation¹. His books went viral in the Finders Community, mostly made up of alumni of the Finders Course and 45 Days to Awakening course, which help one to attain (fairly) persistent states of non-symbolic experience (PNSE), also called Fundamental Wellbeing (FWB²)³. I wrote about my experience transitioning in 2020 when it was fairly fresh. His books range from 26 to 169 pages. Most focus on a few core concepts and gently guide one through understanding (and hopefully implementing) them. Reading (or listening) to the books is very meditative itself.

I’ve read all 40 of the books and think they are worthy of a write-up. The Dotts fascination coincided with investigations into what was called a Charmed Life (CL) (and a lighter relative, a Rich Life (RL)): people who live in a mindless, thoughtless state of perfect flow and engagement with life. Dotts’ books begin focusing on money and interpreting the work of Florence Scovel Shinn, a classic New Thought spiritual teacher, and later move beyond explicit cognitive focus on what one desires: his approach seems to be approaching CL in the limit. Dotts often says that he offers manifestation as a carrot to lure in the mind to what are ultimately spiritual teachings, yet they do work. An interesting perspective is that Dotts’ works provide a conceptual scaffolding by which one can understand just why this sort of approach might work. Further, he offers many points of entry depending on how well-developed one is at navigating the non-symbolic realms of being. I will focus on the Dotts’ Way, as I was not part of the groups actively exploring the rich and charmed lives⁴.

Intro: What’s ihe Very Best You Can Do in Life?

Let’s begin with a thought experiment: how do you know when you’re trying your very best?

What does your very best look like? Shall we first say what we’re doing our best with? The purpose of life is a subtle topic where both subjective and objective lenses help to orient oneself. The cosmos provides a very liberal environment where anything goes so long as it can self-perpetuate. Evolution seen as a statistical law provides no prescriptive diktat: she merely posits that, over time, we should expect to see primarily systems capable of self-perpetuation, of survival, for those that do not will tend to fall away. Do you need to care to survive? No 😜. And when group selection is involved, we may even keep you alive while you actively care for matters unrelated to survival. In fact, we may even care to keep you alive as you don’t care about anything in pure apathy. Cheers to the beauty and diversity of life!

So, wait, what are we trying our best with in the first place? Well, whatever we care about. Some valence realists might claim that pleasure and pain are fundamental aspects of the nature of consciousness, yet even this doesn’t answer the question. There seem to be degrees of freedom as to what systems can value. To further simplify matters, humans can exhibit behavior out of alignment with their explicitly endorsed values. Thus, do you even know what you’re trying to do in life?

For the sake of argument, let’s say that you do! Your lofty goal is called G, without loss of generality. A common catch people fall for is to consider what a generic human could do toward G, figuring that this objective optimum is also what’s best personally. I’ve run into cases where I have emotional friction to taking certain actions that seem effective. Personally, trying to push through has proven practically ineffective. If I have trouble getting myself to do the optimal action for a generic human body, then this doesn’t reflect the best I can do. I can’t in fact do it: I merely employed a faulty model of reality that suggested I could. So are there cases where you know that you can do something effective toward G yet do not do it? I see arguments for both ‘yes’ and ‘no’. The ‘no’ answer implies that you are in fact doing the best you can all the time. You know this by examining this thought experiment until you realize this fact; hopefully the insight sticks. Doing your best looks like this⁵. The ‘yes’ answer implies that there is a meaningful distinction to entities that do what they can⁶.

Life tends to be more richly fun as a multi-objective landscape. We should even evolutionarily expect this to be so. I encourage everyone to reflect upon the beauty that is the law of diminishing returns. There may be only so much you can do toward G in a day. The value of added energy investment may rapidly decrease beyond some threshold. Oh yes, resting may at times be the best course of action. In a partially known world, it’s important to balance exploration with exploiting the best-known strategies, too. And we may not even know what we’re looking for: “You can’t connect the dots looking forward” (Steve Jobs). Entities that bona fide adopt additional goals (or hobbies) once they’ve done enough on the big goals may wind up discovering surprising boosts toward even the big goals compared with ones who singlemindedly hammer away only on the big goals⁷. While I wasn’t interested in “happiness as a goal” for many years, happiness and play may be good additions: whyfor they can always be pursued to great benefit⁸!

Once in a multi-objective landscape, now we must ask if we’re doing our best in the task of choosing which goals to pursue, too. The problem of determining to what extent I can meaningfully contribute to some of my goals at any point in spacetime is non-trivial. Taking actions that one deems to be valuable is much easier than aiming to be maximally effective at advancing the Pareto front of one’s goals (respecting possible priorities among them). My hypothesis is that we return to the answer that if you are indeed really trying, then you are probably doing your best.

Dating provides a classic example where aiming to directly spend as much time on dating apps or talking to potential dates may be highly sub-optimal. One recent study reports that 2/3 of participants entered relationships via friendships, and friendship involves connecting in ways that are mutually valued (probably but not necessarily over values other than dating). For these to be authentic friendships, one needs to be fostering, exploring, and enjoying these connections for their own sake, and not merely as sub-goals. Thus it is unclear when and to what extent one should take action on dating goals, and when one should invest in the rest of life, even for the (indirect) sake of the dating goals.

I must also introduce the concept of open-ended intelligence (OEI): the process of self-organization by which entities individuate. The OEI notion touches upon the capacity to discover new goals, taking intelligence beyond the narrow fixation on effective goal achievement. A fun question I like to add, partially inspired by Tyson Yunkaporta’s Sand Talk, is to ask to what extent I can play a role in intelligent processes of systems encompassing me? If a friend asks for help, that’s easy. I do not even need to understand what my friend’s aims are to contribute. The economy may be pursuing a goal of market equilibrium as well as of price setting, determining the comparative value of various goods and services. I contribute to this every time I make a decision about how to spend happy money. Can contributions to various goals of other entities and meta-systems (even beyond my full comprehension) possibly circle around to support me in my goals and wellbeing? Probably.

A crucial point is that thinking about what to do is itself an action. Overthinking refers to thinking in excess of its pleasure and utility. Underthinking refers to a deficit of thinking where spending a few moments (or minutes) could lead to a significantly better choice. How good are you at determining when thought is an appropriate response to a situation?

Enter the Dotts: Going Thoughtless and Forceless

Enter the Dotts with the first book I read on the topic, Thoughtless Mindless Spiritless Forceless Manifestations. What piqued my interest is the discussion of when and how much to think, whereas I’ve seen a lot of spiritual literature simply come out against thinking altogether. Of course, the point is not to banish practical problem solving, thinking about how to best restructure the transformer architecture or to replace a gasket. The point includes the reduction of incessant worry: can this energy investment be channeled in a fruitful direction? Enter the worry journal: spend 15 minutes pouring your worrisome heart out (at regular intervals, if needed). Now you can relieve whatever parts of yourself were worrying, perhaps seeing the important concerns. You can trust that you’ll make sacred time for worrying, thus freeing up any need for such thoughts to interrupt other scenes of life where they may not provide much contribution. Dotts suggests going further: commit to only thinking on paper. If you adequately clarify your intentions (desires) in your journal, then you don’t need to think about what to do when walking down the street, through the park, in the elevator, eating lunch, or nearly any other activity.

If you’re not thinking about your goals, problems, and issues while in line at the airport, what would you be doing? Enjoying life! If that is one of your cares: you can rest in mindless awareness and the blisses of being.

One hypothesis in favor of this view is that the sporadic hit-and-run thoughts that can intersperse daily activities likely do not actually help much. There may be a felt sense of doing something about a problem, but is this correct? This may come from an incorrect understanding as to the best one can do without appreciating the law of diminishing marginal returns⁹. There is even benefit to unfocusing. Further, while thinking about interesting sociopolitical or research problems during a walk in the woods may be highly valuable, precious time (as well as playfully enjoyable in its own right), starting-and-stopping such thoughts amidst frequent interruptions could contribute far less than you think.

Hindsight reflection can also be examined. Learning from the consequences of one’s actions is verily a virtue. Ruminating on the past (rather than reminiscing on beautiful memories) likely ceases to provide benefit before long. Thus distilling the lessons of experience falls under the header of clarifying one’s intentions.

Jeffery Martin ran a post-transition course for Finders called the Explorer’s Course¹⁰ He’d observed that some Finders reported high wellbeing as various aspects of their lives fell apart. We were given side-by-side images of beautiful mountaintop toilets and dirty outhouses: even if it’s all perfectly ok in either scenario, isn’t one of these preferable¹¹? One highly emphasized feature is maintaining some goal system. The suggested categories were: habitat, finances, leisure, job/income, and relationships. I added health. Regularly reviewing one’s goals and occasionally reformulating them may be even more helpful for people who, otherwise, hardly think about what to do with one’s time and life. These suggestions align well with Dotts’ journaling recommendations.

Dotts’ suggestions are very gentle: try this out and see if you experience benefits. Some should accrue even if you do not fully go thoughtless. The point is to reduce instances of thinking that do not provide benefit to your life, goals, and wellbeing. This can totally be experimentally fine-tuned.

A happy life is just a string of happy moments. But most people don’t allow the happy moment, because they’re so busy trying to get a happy life.
Abraham Hicks

Dotts likes to mention this definition of a happy life. Being a thought-loving philosopher, one heuristic could be, if you’re enjoying the thoughts, then stay zestful and waltz on. Sure, some may wish to pursue the charmed life with zero thoughts ever, but that doesn’t have to be you.

An additional concept is that of forcelessness. Consider the effectiveness of trying to change someone’s mind by hammering them with facts: ey may with the shield of confirmation bias deflect many facts, even solidifying confidence in the beliefs you sought to change. More generally, how advised is trying to help people who do not wish to be helped, who may not even be open to it. I won’t say that there cannot be successes. People do sometimes change their minds in arguments¹². Such forceful actions are often backed by the questionable belief that there are reasonable odds of success in forcing change and progress.

I’ve seen the analogy in business, too. Do you come up with a product that you think is great, taking for granted that people will want it? When it doesn’t sell, you wonder how to force them to see the light. Or do you gauge your audience and the market for interest in what you’re offering before developing the product? Perhaps community feedback will result in the idea transforming into a form that’s more likely to be embraced without force.

Fixating on precisely how a goal should be fulfilled is also a form of forcefulness. Recall that we often don’t know what actions are objectively best to take. We may not even know the full scope of options available, nor what unforeseen circumstances may show up, revealing possibilities that could be hard to orchestrate in advance¹³.

Thus the Dotts’ Way recommends becoming forceless. Release all the energy expenditure from trying to force your intentions to be realized when there is not an opening for them. In this lens, much worrisome thought falls under the category of being forceful: trying to solve problems by hammering away with as much energy as one can until they bear fruit. Now we have another answer as to what to do in the space left behind by the thoughts: remain open to signs that one can take inspired, appropriate action in line with one’s intentions and values.

How does one take forceless action? When the idea for an action arises, check if there is any negative energy or struggle attached to it: if not, proceed with the action immediately. I think there’s some deeper wisdom here that may be easily overlooked. Experiencing doubt about whether to take an action implies that multiple subsystems of oneself disagree about what to do, e.g., one part is afraid and another thinks one should just go for it. Thus forceless action is also holistically coherent action where no part of the self/system is objecting (and some parts are advocating). One may miss out on opportunities, yet it’s debatable that forcing action too soon will actually be better (especially in the big picture). This may very well be close enough to the best one can do anyway.

Intentions, Desires, and the Phenomenal Basis of Communication

Do you distinguish between desires and intentions? Dotts does in a way that I disagree with, etymologically. Etymonline is currently my go-to source for these inquiries. One sees the following:

Want: “to be lacking” from the PIE¹⁴ root *eue- “to leave, abandon, give out.”
Wish: “to cherish a desire” from the PIE root *wen- “to desire, strive for.”
Desire: “to wish or long for” from Latin desiderare “long for, wish for; demand, expect,” the original sense perhaps being “await what the stars will bring,” from the phrase de sidere “from the stars”.
Intend: “to direct one’s attention” from in- “toward” (from PIE root *en “in”) + tendere “to stretch,” from PIE root *ten- “to stretch.

Clearly, the distinction Dotts wishes to draw is between intentions and wants. Wishing and desiring are circularly coupled. Desire almost has more connotations of trusting in universal guidance, another theme of Dotts’. Intending has connotations of positive, constructive outreach. The longing aspect could be taken negatively, as holding the wish in mind is contrary to Dotts’ way, yet the stretching connotations of intending could be seen as similar. Thus I’ll defend my continued use of wish/desire along with intentions. An intention could be stronger, as if this is going to happen. Anyway, later Dotts’ books discuss how to focus one’s intentions non-verbally because, remember, words are only communicative tools to help direct non-verbal fields, our actions, understanding, and feelings¹⁵.

Recall that “the word ‘language’ implies a coded symbolic system that is used to carry concepts and feelings from one life form to another. The word ‘message’ means carrying energy to the appropriate section of the consciousness. And ‘communication’ means the sending of a message across a distance.”¹⁶ Or in Bruce Lee’s terms:

It’s like a finger pointing away to the moon. Don’t concentrate on the finger or you will miss all that heavenly glory.

Thus the point is not to bicker over word choice: it’s to find a word that works well enough to direct our inner states (and resulting inspired actions). The point is to focus on what one would like to experience and not on that which one lacks.

I’ll offer an example from relationships: what seems more appealing to you?

“Oh, I have no friends. I have no one to spend time with. I’m so sad when sitting around at home alone. I don’t know what I’ll do with my life. Please fill this void for me.”
“Oh, I’d really love to spend time discussing the philosophy of life and how to make sense of why some spiritual advice may actually work with someone. You seem into that, too. Let’s be friends and explore these ideas together while engaging in other shared activities we both love!”

The first represents a serious want of companionship. There’s some atmosphere of extortion where you’re pressured into filling the void, lest you become entangled in responsibility for ongoing suffering. There’s not much specificity as to who you’d like as a friend, either.

The second represents an enthusiastic intention for a specific form of companionship, especially with you who share my interest. There’s even a suggestion as to how being friends will feel and look. There’s no suggestion that I will suffer if you don’t wish to be friends: heck, I may continue on philosophizing on my own. What a light touch.

I suspect you’d feel more positively moved by the intention than the want. Desperation is, tragically, known to repel. Returning to a happy life being a string of happy moments, what sort of life tapestry would you like to weave? Would you like to enjoy the journey on the way to the destination? Framing one’s goals in terms of what you lack/want biases one toward directing a tragic tale. Filling one’s life prior to making good friends with enriching activities probably both sets the stage for connecting with aligned people and provides one with a happy life. One will probably be more patient, too¹⁷.

Thus part of the clarity journaling process is to transform needy wants into intentions/desires/wishes.

Heading Sub-Symbolic and Why Inner States Come Before Decisions

So now we’ve made a case that it may actually be a reasonably effective lifestyle to spend most of the time fully enjoying life¹⁸ while minimizing one’s time spent in non-problem-solving, non-enjoyable thought to clarifying intentions. There may be potential failure modes in not operationalizing goal-setting systems, yet this is the same for people living in egoic, narrative, symbolic states of experience as the baseline, too¹⁹. One question is how adaptively attuned one is to reality: does one ignore the calls and catalysts of reality because “everything is perfectly ok”? Or does one respond to prods to pay electricity bills, accepting aligned job offers, as “everything is perfectly ok this way, too”? My experience is that forcelessness requires one to be very sensitively attuned: inaction can be more forceful than flowing with stimuli for action²⁰.

The next book of Dotts I’ll discuss is Automatic Manifestations: Without Stating What You Want.

Putting on my cynical hat, sometimes personal development authors drop surprises that could contribute to much of the success of their advice. For example, in order to free oneself up to relax into being open to flowing with the universe, Dotts suggests to first “ensure that certain linear activities (like the three most important tasks of the day) always get done.” What a gamechanger! How much benefit might someone get from ensuring this without any of the aforementioned advice? A greater sense of peace and relaxation throughout the day? Probably! I recall the classic Getting Things Done seemed to suggest that structuring one’s days effectively, planning in weekly sessions, would allow one to flow through life without much stress. Perhaps this is a virtuous cycle where progress on either front has the potential to help with the other?

Dotts delivers some more good practical advice: “The second most common reason for procrastination is a sense of dread that doing the task will not be enjoyable.” Thus, “on a practical level, I would see if there is a way I can delegate this task and get someone else to take care of it. For example, I do not enjoy making certain administrative phone calls and have delegated all of these to my assistants. So the solution to an issue can often be having someone else take care of the issue.” Sometimes it’s best to simply delegate tasks to others: love and leave life to the servants. Of course, he also says, “Whenever I am faced with something not done, I connect it to NOT-MIND²¹. and get it done. I realize, after the fact, that doing it is like nothing my mind has imagined.” So he finds that the meditative techniques do also help. But, hey, why not try delegating first?

This is a fun, possibly contentious topic: does no-bullshit practical effectiveness matter to the awakened one? Money provides one with more options in life: if deep-seated trauma arises, one can receive care from good therapists. Does meditation leave one immune from trauma or benefitting from the support of others? Yet Saṅgha (community) is clearly included in the Tibetan Buddhists’ Three Jewels. Some degree of social support seems recognized as valuable. To what extent will someone in the right meditative state simply do what’s best all the time? Further, will that best mean that they’ll thoughtlessly delegate that which their system dislikes? Dotts seems to come out on the side that practical productivity still matters: hopefully, one’s meditative practices will help reduce resistance to applying the obvious.

Building upon the principles of forceless action, in Automating Manifestations, Dotts explores how we can align with our intentions without explicitly stating them. Let’s continue the discussion of the point of language. For example, when you’re hungry, do you need to express this in words? Do you need to internally verbalize this fact to yourself? Have you ever found yourself simply going to get some water because you’re thirsty without consciously thinking of the fact? Some people love when friends or lovers get what they need without the need to say anything: silent, shared understanding. This could be communication from situational cues, a shared history, and physical signals. So long as the right parts of the system/brain are entertaining the right concepts and emotions, does it matter how this synchronous situation is achieved? Language provides an amazing service in allowing us to communicate complex concepts and plans with precision, facilitating coordination both within ourselves and among other-selves, and in poetry, language even becomes a beautiful end unto itself. Yet often the value is instrumental. The focus on shifting from wants to intentions is in large part about the non-verbal aspects: our vibes²², our emotional associations, the actions we’re likely to take, how we’ll talk about them, etc.

Consider how negative or positive moods influence perceptual processing. Negative moods seem to attune one to potential threats in the environment, reducing reaction times to reward-indicating stimuli. The mood one’s in may significantly alter how one discusses a topic. Copious relationship advice encourages people to calm down before discussing issues. More Than Words recommends regaining a sense of loving connection first. This could be seen as supporting the stance that nonverbal states and actions are of primary importance. The verbal utterances and ideations are secondary: to guide and coordinate the nonverbal states and actions. The point of shifting from wants to intentions is to inspire one to take actions like the second friendship offer above: the precise wording is less the point than the energy behind the wording that comes out. The precise form will be highly contextually dependent, too²³! Dotts takes this even further:

I repeatedly emphasize that the state from which you make a decision is more important than the decision you ultimately make.
Mindless Manifestation Protocols: for Happiness, Health, and Wealth

Let’s humor the idea by trivializing it. Incorporate all that you are into your state. Everything you’ve learned. All of your intentions. And your values. The fact that you make a decision “from love” may be a more important factor than the details precise decision you make. It may likely be “the best decision you could make”. If in a situation where it really matters that one particular narrow path is taken and you care about this, then if you are sober, well-rested, and in a good mood, you will probably make the right decision if you are so capable. If you aren’t capable, then what’s the point to saying “the decision you make matters” — it only matters in the abstract sense of assuming you are interchangeable with the idealized perfected intelligence²⁴. Dotts further cautions about being in overly excited, positive states: these could also destabilize one and lead to not making as good decisions. Thus, yes, while the actual actions matter, what you say matters, if you mind to your state, you’ll tend to take good actions.

Another fun perk of non-verbally knowing one’s intentions, energetically, is that they may be more open-ended. Trying to linguistically express one’s wishes can lead to extraneous details being added on. Ideally, one could claim, we will place as few constraints on our wishes as possible, allowing for a maximum number of forms of their fulfillment. We should keep them sweetly simple²⁵. Thus, when asked about one’s intentions, one will be able to articulate details as needed, yet can allow these details to fall away after use. Further, one now knows that these symbolic expressions are not the core desire: they may be mild distortions, to be released.

How does one do this in practice? Honestly, I’m less clear on this than the content so far. First, assuming one is clarifying one’s desires in writing already, then this philosophical outlook provides support for not thinking about one’s intentions between journaling sessions. Next, I think the answer is that one will navigate one’s energetic intentions energetically. When a situation elicits an emotional response related to an intention, one can use this as a guide toward refining one’s intentions. Otherwise, there’s no need to bring the intention to awareness. It’s there in the expanded subconscious, “NOT-MIND”.

There’s the question as to how to respond to (traumatic) triggers²⁶²⁷ This resembles the general practice of mindfulness whereby one can become aware of one’s conditioned, reactive responses, creating space in which to respond differently.

Speaking of re-encoding memories, from childhood, I’ve liked the idea of my subconscious being more powerful than my conscious mind. It’s bigger and handles more, right? Doots book Infinite Manifestation Loops essentially covers a technique for directing one’s subconscious to deal with matters recursively until resolution (peace, zero state, love, or whatever you prefer). This process could lead to relying on linguistic articulation less and less. The protocol is:

Direct (what one intends/wishes)
Resolve (what holds one back) (into awareness)
Recurse (toward the outcome)

One can recursively connect to NOT-MIND to identify the right diet for oneself, intending that NOT-MIND let one know through universal impulse and guidance. Thus one will increase one’s sensitivity to when the current situation is off and to when and which actions are appropriate. Before long, one will be responding to non-verbal feedback signals.

There’s the idea that blocks are the primary ‘problem’ standing in the way of manifestations and right action: we generally know what we wish to experience. Thus after shifting to awakened states, one should focus on resolving one’s emotional blocks and beliefs, even directing one’s subconscious to continue connecting traumatic memories to peace in the background. Not taking appropriate actions probably indicates the existence of some block²⁸. “Taking action will then seem like the most natural thing to do in the world, for it springs from Universal impulse!”²⁹ One strengthens one’s connection to states where one naturally does the best one can in response to the situations at hand.

Next, what happens if one doesn’t even think to clarify one’s desires? Suppose one jumps straight to thoughtlessness, without needing to go through clarity journaling. Dotts notes that one doesn’t need to be clear about every aspect of one’s intentions up front. One can lean into the essence of an intention, the one that can be played with gently. Once there is love-based, light-hearted clear inspiration to act in line with this essence, more details of the intention will become clear (non-verbally). Thus it may be possible to bypass all the training wheels. Thinking in symbolic, linguistic abstractions is clearly one form of inner action, yet it may also work to navigate the inner spaces via non-symbolic, non-thoughty action. Or even to trust one’s subconscious processes to do this, consciously focusing only on the lived experience and responding to reality with full presence (“powerful resolution energy”).

I personally see value in the strange loop weaving conscious thoughts through subconscious processes. I think interesting patterns and insights can emerge via thought, and I suspect that something I find precious is probably lost in purely automating thought to dive fully into experiencing the unfolding of life sans sense of agency and separation from the universe³⁰. Yet I also see value in knowing that one can (apparently) navigate life non-symbolically, too! Like a proper reinforcement learner. Learning and exploring when one prefers which mode of operation also seems interesting.

This is what I understand to be the Way of the Dotts. I think there’s something quite intriguing to it, and one can see how meditation and mindfulness practices could actually support living a productive, free life. Ain’t that a sort of holy grail?

I’ve heard many people claim that meditation will simply solve all problems. Richard Dotts’ books seem to provide many techniques that showcase how they could achieve this (nearly as well as can be done). My personal addition is the speculation as to how this might be close to the best one can do, that is, trying to understand why this approach might work. As always, your mileage may vary, and feel free to try it for yourself. Now you, too, can live life in the dream-like shower state. Live life as if in a shower (of love).

The Way of the Woo Takes Dotts to Infinity and Beyond

Ok, you’re now entering the woo-friendly realm of the eurycosm and this post. Woo encompasses fun ideas such as telepathy, PSI phenomena more broadly, ideas about reincarnation-type phenomena, and more. In essence, any purported phenomenon that doesn’t fit within the scope of mainstream theories of physics (to our knowledge) can be classified as woo. This isn’t the place to provide a case for an expanded model of the cosmos, nor to go into evidence for any particular phenomena of interest. I intend to leave woo out of the bulk of the post because I think one doesn’t need to make recourse to woo-type explanations of why the Way of the Dotts might work, and because I think some readers may appreciate this. It also fits the spirit of simplicity!

However, Dotts makes frequent references to explanations for the effectiveness of this way that, relying on woo, go even further. Probably adopting a phenomenological panpsychist idealist lens will be the most helpful, yet it’s not needed. Think of the universe at large as an extended subconscious, sort of like an extended mind. Dotts suggests that one’s thoughts and emotions have an impact on the ‘universal subconscious’ beyond their impact on one’s body and brain’s subconsciouses. The causal (or non-causal) mechanism, I’ll leave as an exercise to the imagination of the reader.

Every energetic inflection you make creates a corresponding effect that may not be instantly perceived in the physical world, but the effect is there. When you step into NOT-MIND and the stateless state, you no longer allow your thoughts to run wild, sending all kinds of thought energy and feeding them into future unwanted manifestations.

Things are always working for you, whether you come to a conscious realization or otherwise. Our conscious awareness often lags behind what is happening energetically.
Automatic Manifestations³¹

Thus the claim is that one is, in fact, always interacting with the universe and universal intelligence. In a closed/separated self model of reality, most of these techniques are highly personal: how you are when alone only matters for your quality of life and in how you’re prepared to seize the day when opportunities arise — or in subtle non-verbal communication to those around you. In this expanded open/unified view, the rest of reality is always faced with your stressed, needy, wanting vibe. Y’all ain’t hiding nothing. Thus it’s even more important to mind your state and clarify your intentions.

The benefit of minimally constraining your intentions is also enhanced: when universal eurycosmic intelligence is exploring how to match your intentions behind the scenes, the less you constrain them, the more synchronous ways open up.

The perfect flow seems more plausible in this lens: fully attuning oneself to one’s partner in this cosmic dance, the universe, giving abundantly knowing she’ll return the favor, one becomes ever so sensitive to her every impulse and guidance, allowing one’s intentions to be sub-linguistically known, never letting thoughts distort the zero-state field of peace in doubt or an effort to understand how it’ll work out, one allows oneself to be guided through all sorts of beautiful experiences that just work out (yet couldn’t have been orchestrated directly).

Outro: Connecting the Dots with Dotts is an End in Itself

That’s all for now, folks. I hope you’ve found it interesting. I’m curious what your thoughts are on quasi-idealized ways of life that are arguably as good as they can be. It’s interesting how the optimal lifestyle might depend on one’s theory/model of the universe, yet there are a lot of commonalities with or without the woo-friendly lens. To an extent, I hope this post helps to shed light on “law of attraction”-type ideas.

One catch is how Dotts essentially assumes you have easy access to awakened states, to NSEs. I’d be curious how effective his guided meditations (books) are at helping people to transition. Some reviewers grok the earlier books and find the later ones fall flat (whreas we FWB folk resonate most with the later ones). Being able to sink into a state of peace (in various ways) can totally help with not thinking (in unhelpful ways) and with releasing emotional blocks. If wishing to transition, I would probably suggest other methods. I doubt his books will hurt, however. Further, I find them to provide perspectives that bring one’s thoughts into harmony with these approaches³². Awakening to PNSE connects back to fully enjoying the journey: imagine you know that you’ll reach your inteneded experiental nexuses: wouldn’t the ideal then be to holistically enjoy every moment of the cosmic dance there, including that deep inner knowing that everything’s basically good? Ok, without the woo, my claim is merely that you can rest assured you’re probably approximately doing the best you can. Once there, awakening is a natural step to enriching life, and, cutely, has the potential to contribute.

I’ve found exploring the Way of the Dotts interesting. I’ve enjoyed some super rich experiences that just flowed nicely, which fit very well with ‘festival mode’. I’m becoming increasingly sensitive to the emotional tenor of conversations with people, seeing how the precise verbiage largely follows from their state/vibe, as if through a mood-biased generative model with their experiential knowledge, goals, etc. Similarly, when doing a loving-kindness mantra, I’m noticing how my state/emotions are affected, and how I can sometimes drop the symbolic middleman to go straight to the flow lof oving-kindness. An important question for me is whether I am not pursuing it only for the results and am happy with this approach/lifestyle as is³³.

I’m not sure where I’ll end up, yet I think this approach will leave an appreciated mark on my character sculpting journey.