Quote:
Originally Posted by mjukr  I'd like your thoughts on this recent article, Steve: The Wrath of the Secretrons
I am open to the ideas in The Secret, but the author here makes some interesting points, particularly the whole "backwards projection" of success statements. |
I'm sorry, but there are a few things which the author doesn't understand.
1. You don't just buy a book or DVD about the Law of Attraction and become phenomenally successful overnight. It doesn't work that way. Among other things, you have to learn how to use the Law of Attraction, and that takes time (and practice).
2. The author's point seems to be that the "LOA experts" were not phenomenally successful from Day One. The big hole in her argument is that she doesn't know when the "LOA experts" started using LOA, and what happened thereafter. She is doing the "backward projection" - unfortunately she has no idea which point in time she should project backwards to.
3. The general impression she tries to convey is that the LOA is a nonsensical fad recently invented to achieve widespread success through "viral marketing" - something like that notoriously bad singer William Hung from American Idol some years back. However, LOA isn't a fad - it's been around for a long time, in different forms. It is one of the eight or nine ancient Hindu siddhis (note - it is only one of the eight or nine siddhis (or powers)); you see an early description of LOA in 1932 by Napoleon Hill; while Jane Roberts' Seth talked a lot about the same sort of thing in the 1960s or 1970s except that Seth didn't call it "Law of Attraction"; then in the 1980s and 1990s, you had Abraham Hicks. Extensive descriptions of how "thoughts create reality" and "reality is illusion" etc show up long, long ago in Buddhism.