Arguments Against the Law of Attraction

While the law of attraction can be universally applied this should not be

misconstrued to mean that it has not been the recipient of its fair share of

criticism following the revelation of its potential to the general public.

Numerous scientific and theological societies have gone to great lengths to

voice their disapproval of this upstart new theory.

Science

Among the most fervent of the protestors are those

who choose to poke holes in the scientific foundation

upon which the law of attraction is built. This scientific

theory is best explained by Michael J. Losier in a

segment of his recently published novel Law of

Attraction.

“There is a physiological foundation for positive thinking and its effect

in creating the law of attraction.

As you may recall from your high school science classes, there are

many forms of energy: atomic, thermal, electromotive, kinetic and potential.

Energy can never be destroyed.

You may also recall that all matter is made up of atoms, and each

atom has a nucleus (made up of protons and electrons) around which orbit

electrons.

Electrons in atoms always orbit the nucleus in prescribed “orbitals” or

energy levels that ensure the stability of the atom. Electrons may be

compelled to assume “higher” orbits by the addition of energy, or may give off

energy when they drop to a “lower” orbit. When it comes to “vibrations,” if

atoms are “aligned,” they create a motive force, all pulling together in the

same direction, in much the same way as metals can be magnetized by

aligning their molecules in the same direction. This creation of positive (+) and

negative (-) poles is a fact of nature and science. Suffice to say, science has

shown that if there are physical laws that can be observed and quantified in

one arena, there are most probably similar laws in other arenas, even if they

cannot at this time be quantified.

So you see, the law of attraction isn’t a fancy term or new age magic; it

is a law of nature that every atom in your body is constantly responding -

whether you know it or not.”

The ideas contained within this explanation were briefly touched on in

previous explanations concerning the foundations of the law of attraction;

However, in order to understand the controversy surrounding these

assumptions it is important that you first understand what these assumptions

are.

Supporters of the theory claim that the effectiveness of the law of

attraction stems from its origin in the field of physics and its supporting facts

in the field of quantum mechanics; after all, the primary argument against

many metaphysical occurrences is that while their origins may be speculated

on, these origins very rarely have more than a small amount of circumstantial

physical evidence to back them up. Who is going to argue about the validity of

a theory which, although assumed to actually be manifesting itself on a higher

plane, has its roots planted firmly in the grounds of modern science.

Unfortunately, much of the “scientific evidence” which has been

brought forward to date in support of the law of attraction has not been

conclusively proven with sufficient reproducibility to allow it to be considered

an actual law of nature. The entire axis upon which the scientific world

revolves was best described by Richard Feynman, one of the finest physicists

of his time and a man whose writings and teachings can still be found in

almost every bookstore and college campus in the country.

In his book Six Easy Pieces Feynman states:

“…nature, as we understand it today, behaves in

such a way that it is fundamentally impossible to

make a precise prediction of exactly what will happen

in a given experiment. This is a horrible thing; in fact,

philosophers have said before that one of the

fundamental requisites of science is that whenever

you set up the same conditions the same thing must

happen. This is simply not true, it is not a fundamental

condition of science…We stated…the sole test of the

validity of any idea is experiment. If it turns out that

most experiments work out the same in Quito as the

do in Stockholm, then those “most experiments” will be used to formulate

some general law…We will invent some way to summarize the results of the

experiment, and we do not have to be told ahead of time what this way will

look like. If we are told that the same experiments will always produce the

same result, that is all very well, but if when we try it, it does not, then it does

not.”

That’s right, straight from the mouth of one of the most revered names

in science to your eyes. Contrary to what your teachers told you in grade

school it is not necessary for an experiment to reproduce itself in order to be

considered both valid and significant. This is an important lesson to

remember throughout life; however, with respect to the process of a theory

becoming established as a law it is important that any experiment conducted

with that theory as its fundamental backbone be reproducible under most

circumstances.

The experimental trials of the law of attraction which have been

performed with the use of test subjects have left a great deal of grey in the

decision as to whether or not the law is actually a law at all. Since

researchers are dealing with the human psyche rather than a physical object

which can be manipulated and controlled it is all but impossible to establish

proper testing conditions which will guarantee a high level of accuracy and

completely unbiased results.

In order for a trial of the law of attraction to be considered conclusive it

is necessary that the test subject follow the guidelines meticulously. This

means that they must remove all of the negative energy from the

subconscious portion of their psyche. This is a condition that is considered to

be “mission critical” in an experiment yet is impossible for researchers to

control.

A test subject cannot be forced through any artificial means to remove

negative thoughts from their subconscious; they may not even know that

these negative thoughts are there (after all,

there is a reason that it is called the

subconscious). Since the key element to

finding success with the law of attraction is

to allow positive energy to dominate your

thought processes, any negative energy

remaining, even deeply buried away from

the conscious mind, will have an adverse

reaction on the results of the experiment.

In addition, since researchers are dealing with the human psyche there is

another factor which has never officially been proven through scientific means

but which is accepted as fact all around the world: the power of the human

mind. You may be looking at this in confusion, asking yourself why the power

of the human mind would be a problem when it is the power of the human

mind which you are attempting to harness in order to find success with the

law of attraction.

The reasons are simple. There are three main factors which stand in the

way of a person achieving their goals. One of these is the body, the other is

the environment. Each of these plays a small role in a person’s ability to carry

out a task which they have chosen for themselves; however, they are not the

key factor responsible for the success or failure of a person’s appointed

mission. The human mind is the primary obstacle standing in the way of a

person and their dreams. If they do not believe that they will be able to

overcome the other environmental and social obstacles standing in the way of

achieving their goal then they will not be able to. On the other hand, if they

believe that they will be able to triumph over these adversities they are almost

guaranteed success. This is not always due to some form of cosmic

influence, however.

Let us look at this dilemma through the eyes of a young adult who is

straight out of college and attempting to start his career. If he has a great deal

of doubt in his ability to succeed in his chosen field and land a job he will be

happy, for his mind will recognize that negativity and make it fact. He will not

be as aggressive as he needs to be in hunting down jobs, and when he does

find a job he will almost inevitably crash and burn in the very first interview

because he will be so sure of his failure that he will not be able to put his best

foot forward. On the other side of the coin, if he is confident that he will be

able to succeed he will portray that confidence in everything that he does,

allowing him to get through his interview with flying colors and land the job of

his dreams.

There was no cosmic influence here, merely a readjustment in attitude

that led to a readjustment in presentation. It is impossible to look at the results

of an experiment relating to the law of attraction and be able to say with one

hundred percent surety that the positive results of these trials were a result of

some form of cosmic influence rather than sheer human determination.

Experimental results are not the only issues causing contention among the

scientific community. A large portion of the theory has fallen under fire as

well. The simple truth of the matter is that from a scientific standpoint the cold,

hard evidence supporting the physical existence of the law of attraction in

nature is weak indeed. Unlike many other experiments dealing with nonmetaphysical

properties of science it is virtually impossible for scientists to

actually examine the individual components which make the law of attraction.

Vibrations being emitted from the body with respect to moods and

emotions are still largely a conceptual idea, and while scientists may be able

to pinpoint the precise energy signatures being emitted by the body, the

technology to recognize whether it is good or bad, stemming solely from the

body’s physical self or having some foundation in the body’s emotional

channels simply does not exist.

In addition to these difficulties scientists do not yet have a means with

which to identify the specific energy waves which comprise an event. For

every change dealt to the status quo in nature, there is both a waterfall of

precursor events which must occur in order for events to proceed as needed

for a specific outcome and a “ripple effect” of changes which will occur as a

result of this change. It is impossible to determine whether or not there is, in

fact, an energy based reason for each of these events, and how the various

forms of energy which must collaborate to bring circumstances to these ends

work together is still a mystery.

Are you confused yet? Probably, which is precisely the point upon which a

great deal of the controversy surrounding this law is founded. The theory

simply does not make sense in any manner that can be specifically

addressed by a scientific team or proven using scientific methods. Where

does that leave the scientific community? Still turning its wheels looking for

answers.