The Law of Attraction: Science, Faith and Doubt

Posted by Harmony Rousseau on Apr 20, 2007 in Philosophy, Secret Movie | 0 comments

Someone left a comment on my Is The Secret Harmful post that said

The only ‘harm’ if any is when you approach the concept of The Secret with doubts in your mind. In that case you will only achieve negative results and become frustrated in the process (sic).

This gets into one of the more controversial aspects of The Secret – whether it’s based on faith or science.

If you watch The Secret, they try to beat you over the head that this is based in science. I’ve mentioned in a previous post how their interpretation of quantum physics differs from mainstream physicists. However, the point I want to make in this post is that science isn’t based in faith.

If you’ve ever taken a science course, you know that experiments must be based in the philosophy of the scientific method. That is, a researcher forms hypothesis – that is, her explanation of some natural phenomena. Then, she puts together an experiment to test that hypothesis, and painstakingly works to eliminate biases and outside forces that may effect her experiment’s outcome. If she gets the results she expects, great. If not, she theorizes why her results may have strayed from her hypothesis.

But her research alone doesn’t make something universally accepted. Next, other researchers try to replicate her results. If they get similar results, they will modify the experiment slightly and see if the results are also predicted. They will publish their findings in peer reviewed journals so that others may look at the experiment and point out biases they may have missed – or other possible explanations for the results they received.

As research around a subject builds, those ideas and hypotheses become theories, which in turn lead to more hypotheses and experiments. In other worlds, science does not just accept on faith that one researcher’s results are true. There is a healthy dose of skepticism and doubt in any findings that aren’t consistent with mainstream theories – those theories that have become accepted as “the best explanation we have so far” for natural phenomenon.

On the other hand, if you listen to Rhonda Byrne or you trace the principles of The Secret movement back, you’ll find it has its foundations in the New Thought Movement of the 19th century. That is, it’s based in faith and spirituality, not science. Faith, in this regard, is defined as “belief that is not based on proof.”

You must have faith that you can accomplish this or that. You must have faith that it works every time, no exceptions. You must have faith that the universe is a large catalog and all you need to do is pick out exactly what you want. You must have faith that if you ask and believe, you will receive.

Now, you might say, “it worked for me” or “it worked for Rhonda Byrne” – isn’t that proof enough? From a scientific perspective, no, it isn’t. Testimonials and first hand accounts can be misleading – just ask any trial lawyer who must interview several witnesses for his recent court case. Chances are slim that they will tell the exact same story.

Part of this is because our memories just aren’t as good as we think. As time passes, we tend to forget bits and pieces.

But much of it has to do with our upbringing and how we process information. Both you and I can attend the exact same event and walk away with completely different experiences.

Or take, for instance, this past year’s Superbowl where the Indianapolis Colts beat the Chicago Bears. If you were a Colts fan, you’d experience the game completely differently than a Bears fan, who’d experience the game completely different form someone who disliked football.

Our perceptions, likes, dislikes, fears, and past experiences are all factors in how we interpret situations. Since no one has exactly the same perceptions, likes, dislikes, fears, and past experiences, it’s impossible for two people to have the exact same experience – they’d each interpret it differently.

The same holds true for the law of attraction. You may swear up and down that it’s working for you in a particular way, whereas I might observe your situation and conclude that you got what you wanted, not because of law of attraction, but simply the effect of an action you took last month. Or perhaps because you decided to focus solely on one thing – so you began noticing other opportunities and resources that could help you.

In other words, proof based on experience is subjective. It may be true for you – or even true for many people in a particular situation – but that doesn’t mean that it works every time, no exceptions.

For it to be proven scientifically, several researchers would have to do independent studies controlling for outside factors that may affect the experiment. They’d form a hypothesis, run the experiment to control for specific variables, observe the outcome and interpret the findings. Then, others would repeat the same experiment. If they continued to get the same results, then, they’d construct a theory and hammer out the specifics – when it works, when it doesn’t, why it works, why it doesn’t. They’d look at the math, chemistry, psychology, and every other factor that might play a role in the overarching explanation. They’d drill down to the core processes and explain this is how it is working. That’s science.

Related Posts

• No Related Post