'The Secret' is Fake - A thoughful criticism

[John Wesley]

Rather than either totally endorsing the film or dismissing it (and the LoA) as ridiculous, this reviewer has thoughtfully explained that, while the LoA is real, the way it is described and supported in the film 'The Secret' is a bunch of 'quantum flapdoodle'.

Check out the review and share your thoughts. And please don't waste everyone's time by ripping it just because it says something negative about 'The Secret', at least leave the reason behind your opinion.

[Acting Like Godot]

The reviewer asserts that LOA is real. He then goes on to elaborate on his assertion. He says that it's real, because it influences your creativity, motivation and other personal attributes.

Well, I say that LOA is real, and not only because it influences your creativity, motivation and other personal attributes. It also influences external events, circumstances etc.

The reviewer says that there is no evidence for the "magical" aspects of LOA. I say that there is plenty of evidence for these "magical" aspects.

So there we go again. Another "argue-until-the-cows-come-home" situation. The bottom line is very simple. Go try it for yourself, really try it out, and you will see it.

I have. Have you, really?

[Margaret]

I agree with the reviewer. My first concern when I watched "The Secret" was the fictional premise that some power or powers had sought to keep it for themselves. I also agree with the general message, that positive thinking will improve ones life, is true. I dont discount the movie, because any way that message can be transmitted to the population has to do some good. As to it manifesting into tangible goods, I believe that can and does happen. Not quite in the Santa Claus coming down the chimney belief, rather because the subject has decided to take a different path as determined by a whole new attitude towards what he/she wants from life. Believing that one deserves something better can actually manifest itself into something better be it a new car or a larger home.

[tropicality]

Originally Posted by Margaret

I agree with the reviewer. My first concern when I watched "The Secret" was the fictional premise that some power or powers had sought to keep it for themselves.

Hmmm.... Actually if you've ever studied anything esoteric in depth you will have learned that indeed TPTB keep such 'secrets' for themselves, as has been done for the past 2000+ years...

[John Wesley]

Originally Posted by tropicality

Hmmm.... Actually if you've ever studied anything esoteric in depth you will have learned that indeed TPTB keep such 'secrets' for themselves, as has been done for the past 2000+ years...

That may be true for actual secrets, but is the power of positive thinking really a secret? This isn't exactly the Da Vinci Code we're talking about.

To me it seems like some people took the idea of the LoA, made it mysterious, called it a science, made up a totally unmeasurable link with quantum physics, and proceed to sell boat loads of books and videos.

[sourceofmiracles]

Good stuff. I love theSecret and I've referred to many people. But you makes some good points.

1. No proof that famous historical people knew the secret: I guess this depends on context. Many of the famous people eluded to on the site [thesecret.tv] are world class go-getters (especially in their prime). But did they know the "law of attraction" by that name... I doubt it.

2. No proof that the Law of Attraction was kept secret (conspiracy): I kind of saw that bit as a dramatization put in the Secret.

Although one might argue that the Holy Roman Church [et al] annihilated many sects that actively practiced the Law of Attraction (i.e. Rosicrucians.. if you look closely you will see this name flashed in the title sequence of the secret BTW.. The Rosicrucians -occult,societies, gnostics, heretics and others- that practiced the Law of Attraction a.k.a "magic, thought forms, visualization" or anything that did not conform was destroyed... this purification was done by Nazi Germany, the Holy Roman Empire, and other nationalistic empires that wanted complete control. Many churches go out of their way to discredit to this day.)

3-5. The Secret is Pseudo Science: As I've said in a previous post, I won't even pretend to understand what quantum physics has to do with mysticism, but I do have pretty strong oppinion about the dogmatic even religious steps that science seems to have taken.

Apparently, the belief in pseudo science is on the rise in the U.S. LiveScience.com - American Belief in Pseudoscience on the Rise
This includes UFOs, psi, astrology, mind over matter and many others.
The scientific incrowd throw them ALL out wholesale. There is such a stigma in the "accepted" scientific community that even an honest open minded question into the POSSIBILITY of the above areas deemed pseudo science can be career ending. Personal experience and phenomenology are also thrown out so that one is supposed to question their own sanity prior to believing their own eyes.

I often ask myself, who has a monopoly on reality? Science or Religion? Neither, of course. Both are simply measurements and guides on life and reality but somehow people have completely reversed this. Somehow, we have become the mere measurements of science and the puppets of religion with human perspective and life as a passing anomaly or a sin to be cleansed.

So do I believe that the human mind can influence the physical reality? I believe that an awakend mind is the most power force in the world. Able to split atoms, influence others, attain deeper understanding of the environment and more importantly, able to make up its own damn mind.

[Velvet]

What I like about this critique (and keep in mind I believe in LoA and for the most part think The Secret is a nice, helpful film):

• It calls out the whole "Einstein, Plato, Edison" assertion, which I also found dubious.

• I, too, think it's a little hype-y and pointless to make like this is "secret" knowledge, when people have been talking about this stuff for...ever. And not secretly.

• He criticizes the film w/o throwing the baby out with the bathwater

• He distrusts the pseudo-science as much as I do

But, as someone else brought up: how can you say you believe in LoA and not believe that the universe provides?

Anyway, good post, thanks for that link. (I do like the rest of the man's site).

[Rocket Surgery]

Well, after reading the review, it's clear the critic is NOT a believer in subjective reality and/or metaphysical theories and concepts of reality. He's clearly an "objective universe", hard science kind of guy, so his opinions need to be considered in that context.

As a writer of scripts and screenplays, I understand the need for editing a story down to a comfortable length for the audience. Were the producers of The Secret to include scenes that dealt with the famous people of history who used the Secret and with examples of TPTB keeping the LoA to themselves, the movie may well have been lengthened to the point of intolerability. For all we know, they did shoot such scenes, but they wound up on the "digital" editing room floor when cutting the film for length.

Personally, I would have preferred to see such scenes instead of the "boy wishing for bicycle" segment ad nauseum, but it was not my editing decision. And, truthfully, for a first-time producer, Ms. Byrne cranked out an impressively well-produced and packaged documentary that was fairly inspirational and entertaining.

To me, the film The Secret is akin to a primer on LoA and metaphysical beliefs and concepts. It makes itself "attractive" to the metaphysically uninitiated by dwelling on the more materialistic desires of same -- wealth, success, romance -- while at the same time opening up thousands upon thousands of human minds to the underlying truths of subjective reality.

One can imagine your average metaphysical "virgin" eventually saying, "Wow, I watched The Secret because I wanted to boost my income, but I found myself so fascinated with the theories behind it, that I discovered a whole new way of thinking about reality! Now I understand that I am the Creator of my own Life!"

Many people find their path to God through a desire for physical healing or lack of purpose. The important thing is not the relative worthiness of their particular motivation to seek God, but that they were motivated at all and do indeed begin the journey as a result. Surely, many souls come to this planet and immediately place themselves on a destructive path, for their higher selves know that by "hitting bottom," it will provide the wakeup call they need to seek out a higher purpose to their existence.

The Secret, to me, is the perfect packaging of an ancient philosophy for attracting the masses to metaphysical theories and concepts.

No doubt, 2000 years ago, the sick and the blind hobbled over to hear this Jesus person preach simply because of the rumors they'd heard of instant healings just by touching his garment. But once there, healed or not, how many stuck around simply due to the new ideas he shared?

Those who seek nothing more than increased material gain will soon be disappointed and return to their blindness and mock "The Secret." Those who recognize the real message behind all the glitter will grow and thrive.

~ RS

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by sourceofmiracles

Apparently, the belief in pseudo science is on the rise in the U.S.

The word "pseudo" in the phrase "pseudo science" has negative connotations in the minds of people who do not know what "pseudo science" means.

The key defining component of pseudo science is that the hypothesis or theory can't be tested scientifically. It does not mean that the hypothesis or theory is untrue.

Economics and psychology, for example, are largely pseudo-science. Many of their theories are not scientifically verifiable.

The belief that your mother loves you is also unscientific, that is, it can't be scientifically proven (so far, scientists have not found a method of proving the existence of love or measuring it).

However, I doubt if you need science to find out whether your mother loves you or not.

[yeslist]

Hi All
I wonder which version of the movie the reviewer was reviewing?
I live in Australia and I have the original version of the movie. Very different from the latest version. I watched the second version once just to find the differences between the two. I have no further intention to watch the second version as it is watered down in my view. The first version is for folk who are not scaredy cats. Does it really matter that there is a Channel Involved if the info the channel is transmitting is beneficial to those that receive it.

Cheers
Simon

[Elenny]

Originally Posted by yeslist

Hi All
I wonder which version of the movie the reviewer was reviewing?
I live in Australia and I have the original version of the movie. Very different from the latest version. I watched the second version once just to find the differences between the two. I have no further intention to watch the second version as it is watered down in my view. The first version is for folk who are not scaredy cats. Does it really matter that there is a Channel Involved if the info the channel is transmitting is beneficial to those that receive it.

Cheers
Simon

He was most likely reviewing the second version, since his review is dated March 15, 2007.

I don't think this gentleman actually did much research, because on his first paragraph he said he couldn't find a rebuttal on The Secret, when the truth is hundreds of newspapers and media outlets have done "rebuttals" and negative reviews on The Secret, especially in the last few months since Larry King and Oprah did their shows.

He also states that the law of attraction is real because he has used it "a number of occasions" and it has worked.

I believe that the LoA is a way of life, not something you try a few times when you're really desperate for something, so I'm not sure how vested he is on the entire concept.

For those of you that haven't seen the original version of The Secret, I would recommend Googling it and watching it online. It's a few minutes shorter, but much more inspiring than the "extended" version.