The law of attraction and The Secret are bunk. I’ll say it again: The Secret is complete bunk. Based on the comments to my latest post, some people disagree, think I missed the point, or think I did a poor job articulating exactly why it shouldn’t be taken seriously. So, here’s a small list of reasons (out of many) that The Secret is retarded.
If you view the law of attraction as nothing more than a motivational tool, then this post isn’t for you. It is a good motivational tool, and I don’t dispute that. This post is for the people who think the law of attraction has some kind of special power, and invoke silly arguments to try to defend it.
- Belief in the Paranormal/Supernatural.
Believing that the law of attraction is more than just a motivational tool, that it actually has some power to control the universe, requires a belief in the supernatural. To believe that wanting, or wishing for, or concentrating on a goal will cause an increase in the chances of that goal occurring requires a belief in the supernatural. To believe that thought alone has the ability to change events requires a belief in psychic powers.
That’s exactly what psychic powers are: controlling events with thoughts. If you can actually control events with your mind, then the law of attraction will make you money, because James Randi will give you a million dollars.
- Anecdotal Evidence.
The fact that some people who have made lots of money claim to use the law of attraction doesn’t mean that the law of attraction has any effect. Can you say placebo effect?
Some people claim that keeping a rabbits foot brings them good luck. Some people think that breaking a mirror will bring bad luck. Nonsense. There’s no scientific evidence that good luck charms have anything more than a placebo effect. Likewise, there’s no evidence that the law of attraction is anything but a placebo.
There are plenty of people who are wealthy who don’t claim that the law of attraction made them their money. There are also lots of people who are not wealthy who blindly cling to the law of attraction in a desperate attempt to change things.
In the words of Steve Pavlina, “I often hear people complain that they’ve dutifully and correctly applied the Law of Attraction, but their intentions just aren’t manifesting.” Of course, it’s because they aren’t putting enough energy into it. Just like faith healers tell people it’s a lack of belief that stops them from walking.
- Unreliable Sources.
It seems that many of the people who claim to have made fortunes using the law of attractions are the very same people selling books and movies about the law of attraction. It seems to be a conflict of interest when the people telling you the law of attraction works are the same people selling the law of attraction.
The drug companies always think you need their latest pill, and every car maker will tell you that their models are the best in the business. They are, of course, biased. Without independent validation, these kinds of claims should be treated with serious skepticism. (Even with independent validation, a healthy dose of skepticism is always a good idea.)
- Blaming Victims.
Picture this: You’re driving along the road late at night, listening to the radio. You’re on your way home from dinner at a friend’s house. Your favorite song is on the radio, and you’ve got a smile on you face. Every so often, a car passes you heading the other direction. Suddenly some drunk asshole swerves over into your lane, plowing into your car head-on.
Now tell me, who do you blame for that accident? Is it your fault? Did you attract that accident? The Secret specifically says that people do attract the car accidents they are in.
I have nothing else to say about this.
- Quantum Physics.
The Secret makes mention of quantum physics, as did a commenter on the last post. Let’s be clear about this: quantum physics doesn’t affirm the law of attraction or any other claims about the supernatural.
Yes, quantum physics states that the act of observation can affect quantum particles. That does not mean that observation can control quantum particles. They still behave in a nondeterministic manner. i.e. They act randomly. Their behavior follows statistical rules, just like coin tosses.
If you can demonstrate that your thoughts can control the outcome of quantum-level events, I’m pretty sure you would win a Nobel prize. It would be, by far, the biggest discovery in quantum mechanics.
- The Cast.
Much of the cast was made of up people who’ve made their fortunes selling this “secret,” and few of them have any credentials that were impressive to anyone willing to do any critical thinking. Among the cast, we’ve got some philosophers, a feng shui consultant, a metaphysicist, and a visionary. Yes, a visionary.
Philosophers - Philosophy is a degree in sitting around, thinking deep thoughts. That’s fine, but it doesn’t qualify you to make outrageous claims about “the most powerful law in the universe.” I used to think logic was part of philosophy, but I guess not.
Feng shui consultant - What is it about charging obscene fees for arranging furniture that qualifies this person to give advice about wealth? The formula for wealth she used was:
- Make up claims of understanding old, hokey Chinese belief about Qi.
- Charge lots of money to move furniture around.
Metaphysicist - This is just another way of saying philosopher. Strangely enough, the philosophers and the metaphysicist seem to have written lots of books about wealth, and not so many about the nature of life, intelligence, the universe, or anything else that traditionally falls into the realm of philosophy.
Visionary - Seriously, his job title was listed as “Visionary.” This doesn’t even mean anything. It’s a self-appointed title that’s as meaningless as “guru,” and somehow even more self-indulgent.
If you want to buy into The Secret and the law of attraction, that’s your right. If you want to avoid critical thinking and hold onto ridiculous claims, you can. But the law of attraction is bunk, and you’re wasting your time and money.
18 Comments on “The Top 6 Reasons Why the Law of Attraction (and “The Secret”) is Bunk”
Leave a Reply
2 Linkbacks to “The Top 6 Reasons Why the Law of Attraction (and “The Secret”) is Bunk”
-
The Truth About the Law of Attraction - Or - “The Secret” is Retarded « Former Slacker Says:
February 20th, 2007 at 1:23 pm[…] also: The Top 6 Reasons Why the Law of Attraction (and “The Secret”) is Bunk) Posted by Derek Park | Filed in Finance, Character, Personal Development, Career, Dieting, […]
-
The Law of Attraction « Ascending Consciousness Says:
May 28th, 2007 at 7:55 am[…] to A Philospher, Get Rich Slowly :), and Former Slacker for their posts on “The Secret,” that is not a law or […]
February 20th, 2007 at 5:56 pm
But,
I made a wish.
A powerful wish.
I blew on the candles.
I believed, with a belief as pure and unwavering as a ruby laser.
I felt the power of my belief come over me.
Ha! I cried to those of little faith.
See, the candles did go out!
February 23rd, 2007 at 12:56 pm
I am a philosopher who has a degree in physics and who is offended by your characterization of philosophy. Here are my reasons for being offended. Philosophy is not the same as being a metaphysician, whatever the fark that is. Metaphysics is part of philosophy, but it is not clear that metaphysicians do any thing that might remotely be considered metaphysics (they are just using the terms differently). Philosophy is not just sitting around thinking deep thoughts. Like physicists, philosophers are really interested in figuring out the truth(s) of nature, reason, and what it is to be human (and what truth is and how we can go about making that discovery). I don’t know much about the law of attraction, but it sounds like BS. Pop appeals to QM are also (usually) BS. But that that doesn’t mean that philosophy is not interested in figuring out truths, which might include laws of nature (even if the law of nature is not the law of attraction). You are right to think that philosophers are concerned with logical since the method of philosophy is logical argumentation. That some people call themselves philosophers but do not adhere to these standards is not to condemn the whole discipline. Some men are rapists, does that mean that men (in general) are not concerned with rape being morally reprehensible? Your dismissal of philosophy is simply crass and as bad as the people you are criticizing. And that stands even if this law of attraction nonsense is completely bunk which I am sure it is.
February 23rd, 2007 at 1:27 pm
Dave, there are certainly a few philosophers with worthwhile things to say. Unfortunately, there seem to be a lot of idiots and scam artists who call themselves philosophers as well (perhaps especially in recent decades?). Most of the philosophy majors I’ve met seem, quite frankly, to have simply picked what they felt would be an easy major. Most of them likewise have no idea what they actually intend to do with the degree. My opinion of modern philosophers in general is somewhat low, not necessarily because I think philosophy is not a worthwhile field, but because most of the “philosophers” I’ve encountered are not worthwhile practitioners. (e.g. Firm grasp of logic does not seem to be as prominent as it should be.)
Nonetheless, I hope that my generalization about philosophers was not the only thing you took away from this article.
February 24th, 2007 at 5:17 pm
It doesn’t logically follow that because a few pseudoscientists call themselves philosophers that philosophy (and philosophy students) are worthless.
I agree with Aristotle: philosophy is something worth studying as end in itself, although that doesn’t mean it isn’t useful.
(Also, can you point me to a pseudoscientist who actually outright calls himself a philosopher?)
February 24th, 2007 at 10:47 pm
Undergroundman, my generalization is based on inductive reasoning. If all the philosophers I’d encountered were worthless, then in fact, I could assume that all philosophers are worthless. It’s not logically binding, but it is nonetheless accepted reasoning.
If your argument were correct, I could use it to argue that the fact that all the cyanide I’ve encountered is poisonous doesn’t mean that all cyanide is poisonous. Logically, it does not follow that all cyanide is poisonous, but that doesn’t destroy the usefulness of the conclusion. The scientific method is built on inductive reasoning.
While it’s true that not all philosophers are worthless (which I already agreed to earlier), the generalization isn’t invalidated simply because there are some exceptions.
You want a pseudoscientist who calls himself a philosopher? Watch the secret, and you’ll find that Bob Proctor and others are given that title. Presumably they chose the title themselves. Anyone who claims that the law of attraction is “proven” or a law is a pseudoscientist (at best) in my book.
February 25th, 2007 at 4:47 pm
I think you’re knowingly encouraging misinformation when you call these people philosophers and lump philosophy into pseudoscience. They may call themselves philosophers but it would be more useful for you to make the distinction in your post, as you know that there is quite a large difference. I doubt any of these people even have a degree in philosophy.
You’re being disingenuous when you argue that the argument is inductive: you know that these “philosophers” aren’t really philosophers. To generalize that most philosophers are worthless from your experience with pseudophilosophers is dishonest. (Unless, of course, you didn’t know that these people were pseudophilosophers when you posted that — in which case you are being educated.)
I don’t really know a ton of contemporary philosophy, but if you want to learn about it, this guy certainly his stuff: http://trssastt.blogspot.com/
Modern philosophy, as you may know, has separated into two schools of thought: analytic and continental. Neither of them are like these pseudoscientists and they mainly ignore each other. The former is considered more logically rigorous. It’s very concerned with language, knowledge, mathematics, and universal ethics. The latter is more like literature and studies the effects of ideas and the system on how we form knowledge and moral judgments, as well axiology (the study of values).
Most undergraduates majoring in philosophy are not choosing an easy major because most philosophy professors, as lovers of truth and knowledge, have very high standards (at least in my school). Philosophy majors actually score the highest on the verbal section of the GRE of any major and do fairly well on the quantitative section (better than any other humanities major).
See here: http://people.brandeis.edu/~teuber/phillsat.html
Or just search the internet for: philosophy majors GRE or LSAT or GMAT
What did you major in as an undergrad?
February 25th, 2007 at 9:48 pm
You asked me to name pseudoscientists who call themselves philosophers, and when I answer I get accused of encouraging misinformation?
I don’t really feel that I have any duty to wage a war of clarification to separate the pseudoscientists from the philosophers. Maybe I should, but I don’t.
And I’m not being disingenuous. I never said that my opinion of philosophy (or philosophers) was based solely on these “philosophers”. As I’ve already said, my experience with philosophers (and phil. majors) in an academic setting has not been impressive. I’m sure my opinion of philosophers is not the most well-rounded. My opinion on most topics probably isn’t the most well-rounded, but it’s what I’ve got.
I’m sorry, but I’m really not interested in debating the merits of philosophers or philosophy any further. That wasn’t even remotely the point of this article, and I’ve now probably spent more time defending a small quip I made about philosophers than I initially spent on the entire article.
I majored in computer science as an undergrad.
February 28th, 2007 at 6:00 pm
I wish you had seen the CBS evening news tonight. You would have liked it, topic “The Secret is Bunk.”
Maybe you can get a transcript.
:P
March 1st, 2007 at 9:28 am
I’m assuming this is the story you’re talking about. Some of the comments are pretty good, too.
March 2nd, 2007 at 4:03 am
Derek said:
“I’m assuming you’re talking about. Some of the comments are pretty good, too.”
–Sorry, is that a reply to what I said or something else? If it’s in response to what I said, I don’t follow for some reason, could be lack of sleep though. I’m going to sleep now, maybe I’ll understand it in the morning.
‘nite
March 2nd, 2007 at 7:43 am
I was talking to you. I’m not sure what happened. There was a link in there to the story, but I somehow confused wordpress and it mangled the link. I’ve fixed the comment now.
March 16th, 2008 at 5:52 pm
I agree with you. I think The Secret and its off-shoots are bunk. But would you mind editing the word ‘retarded’? I find that very offensive. Perhaps use ‘ridiculous’ ‘unrealistic’ ‘wrong-headed’ ‘naive’ — choose your adjective. But like the many thousands who have relatives or children who’ve been stung by that label (’r'), I’d prefer a better choice of words. Were the world different, we could use the word in its original meaning, but the world has changed and it’s become a hurtful slam.
Thanks…
AE
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:54 pm
I would like to say some words about philosophy here. You see, philosopher is a philosopher when he
has questions - “What is life? What is Universe? What’s this all about?”. Because he is interested in
the PROCESS of finding the answers. But when he finds these answers in the Law of Attraction and other
laws of the Universe, that should be taken as axioms, because the mind needs a basis. So our
philosopher found an answer to all his questions - who is he now? Philosopher? No?
Of course not, he is now a lunatic to the other people, because they didn’t understood anything he
said, and that happened because they DIDN’T want to understand. That is why other philosophers start to shout things like - “We know better, he doesn’t know a damn thing, he is not a philosopher”.
Guess why? Because the world is multishaped, so if you find a proof that the other man’s words are
false, it is only because YOU want it this way, and you attracted that PROOF. And the universe says to
you - “Here is your choice”. And you find yourself followers, who also say that the Law of Attraction
is nonsense.
But the followers of Law of Attraction will find proofs for their theory, because the world will turn
to their side also, because it is multishaped and depends on your thoughts.
The main thing is - those who are “AGAINST” like to start a war, they like to fight for their beliefs,
while others don’t need to fight, don’t need to proove, because they know that these things work for
themselves. Every man has a choice, but the right to control others’ choice is forbidden. And these
days we can see it everywhere - people try to control other people, that is the disease of the planet.
We are not here to change the world where everybody’s living, whether they want it or not, we are here to create our own world and live with people that we want to live with. If you have foes, let them live their own lives, the planet is big enough to forget about them and never meet them.
Waste your time on your researches and not the critisism of others, because you don’t have any rights to judge other people, whether you understand what they say or not.
Good luck to everyone!
September 3rd, 2008 at 10:14 am
Stan, your self-important prose makes my head hurt. I’m not even sure how to address your comment. It was so rambling and convoluted that it was difficult to even read. You spent hundreds of words dressing up your hollow argument with pseudo-philosophy and new-age speak. “The world is multishaped”? That doesn’t even mean anything.
No one is starting “a war” about the law of attraction. I’m not trying to control other people, or force my beliefs on them. I made a blog post about why the law of attraction is stupid. I stand by that statement, and I think it’s sad that you are so threatened by critical thought that you are unable to respond plainly, and instead make bizarre accusations of persecution wrapped up in silly new-age double-talk.
I’m frankly embarrassed to have your awkward ramblings on my blog at all, but I’ll leave them, because anyone with any critical thinking skills will read what you posted and immediately recognize that you said nothing of substance, and that your entire post was constructed to hide that fact.
September 4th, 2008 at 8:26 am
We speak different languages, it was difficult for me to understand your response too. =)
It’s funny to notice that, because the world is not just multishaped, by what I meant that it is different to each human as an observer.
For example: For rich person the same street he is walking looks great, because he pays attention to beautiful trees, advertisements and all things like that, But for the poor person the exact same street looks awful, because he sees dirt on the road, garbage bins and other things. You get the point?
So I mean, that the world is not just multishaped, it’s like a mirror - you see and receive the same what’s inside of you…
Anyway I am not going to feed you up with this “new-age double-talk” anymore, I’ll just quote what Jesus said:
“Do not give what is holy to dogs, and do not throw pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.” (Matthew 7:6).
September 4th, 2008 at 9:58 am
I agree that we all see the world differently. I even agree that the way we look at the world has a major effect on what happens to us. I don’t, however, think that there’s anything magical or especially secret about that. Positive people tend to find opportunities, while negative people do not. That’s not the same as wishing for things and having them come true, which is what the “The Secret” is all about.
September 14th, 2008 at 3:12 pm
Hey Derek. Interesting post.
It’s funny though that you use the placebo effect in the post as this is one of the proof that points out that the law of attraction DOES exist.
There are several people who has been given a sugar pill instead of medicine - and POOF - they got cured.
If the medicine didn’t cure them - then the only reason are the thoughts.
The thoughts that the “pill” would cure them. And it did. No matter is it was medicine or sugar…
Just saying. :)
September 14th, 2008 at 10:15 pm
Yo, all the placebo effect proves is that people are good at deceiving themselves. This has nothing to do with, e.g., wishing for money and suddenly receiving checks in the mail.