Is the world attracted to our desires, so that we always get what we want? Will the universe react to our infantile wishes like a cursed lamp and destroy us? Read on to find out.
New Thought (or rather, its degraded modern offspring) is a testimony to the failure of religion & philosophy, as well as the infantilism of those who embrace it. To reduce the grandeur of this infinitely vast & ancient universe to the equivalent of a giant gumball machine is something I doubt I'll ever be able to sympathize with or understand. When I look up at the stars at night the thought "This is all for me." is unthinkable & the kind of psyche that would think that way is as alien to me as the mind of Cthulhu.
As an aside it should be said that the Law of Attraction states that the Universe responds not so much to our desires as to our thoughts. So, for example, an incel may really want to get laid but if all he ever thinks about is how starved for sex & affection he is, the law of attraction will respond to those thoughts by making his situation even worse. So it's really very simple: ignore reality as much as possible by spending all of your free time daydreaming about what you want &, in its own good time, the universe will respond by making all your dreams come true! All incels need to do is watch more pornography. All poor people need to do is indulge in more window shopping. The law of attraction will do the rest!
It seems to come down to a difference in character. Optimists, narcissists, or ambitious and highly successful people are attracted to New Thought, because it flatters them and justifies their privileges, whereas the opposite characters are drawn to the scientific, more alienating view of nature.
I doubt there are total failures or unambitious people who aren't trying hard to become rich (who would thus read New Thought books to practice the techniques), who nevertheless subscribe to the idea of the secret law of attraction. Belief in that "law" is best thought of as such an alleged technique of self-improvement or rather as a step in a con.
I suppose you're right about the difference between desires and thoughts. But a desire for X entails the thought that X is good, just as the thought that X is good entails the desire for X to be obtained or maintained. So I think that's more a semantic point.
This article began as a reply of mine to a comment made on one of my other Medium articles, and we were talking there about desires, so that's why the focus in this article was on desires.
Great article. I wonder if these followers of the law of attraction realize that say if someone had desires that would be regarded as sick or evil, would the person with those desires be regarded by the believers as being justified in working towards fulfilling those desires since to them the universe responds to your thoughts.
Exactly! As I said in the article, it looks like the reason it's called a "secret law of attraction" is to capitalize on the amorality of scientific language. This anthropocentric "law" has to be amoral because its true function is to justify Western consumerism.
New Thought (or rather, its degraded modern offspring) is a testimony to the failure of religion & philosophy, as well as the infantilism of those who embrace it. To reduce the grandeur of this infinitely vast & ancient universe to the equivalent of a giant gumball machine is something I doubt I'll ever be able to sympathize with or understand. When I look up at the stars at night the thought "This is all for me." is unthinkable & the kind of psyche that would think that way is as alien to me as the mind of Cthulhu.
ReplyDeleteAs an aside it should be said that the Law of Attraction states that the Universe responds not so much to our desires as to our thoughts. So, for example, an incel may really want to get laid but if all he ever thinks about is how starved for sex & affection he is, the law of attraction will respond to those thoughts by making his situation even worse. So it's really very simple: ignore reality as much as possible by spending all of your free time daydreaming about what you want &, in its own good time, the universe will respond by making all your dreams come true! All incels need to do is watch more pornography. All poor people need to do is indulge in more window shopping. The law of attraction will do the rest!
It seems to come down to a difference in character. Optimists, narcissists, or ambitious and highly successful people are attracted to New Thought, because it flatters them and justifies their privileges, whereas the opposite characters are drawn to the scientific, more alienating view of nature.
DeleteI doubt there are total failures or unambitious people who aren't trying hard to become rich (who would thus read New Thought books to practice the techniques), who nevertheless subscribe to the idea of the secret law of attraction. Belief in that "law" is best thought of as such an alleged technique of self-improvement or rather as a step in a con.
I suppose you're right about the difference between desires and thoughts. But a desire for X entails the thought that X is good, just as the thought that X is good entails the desire for X to be obtained or maintained. So I think that's more a semantic point.
This article began as a reply of mine to a comment made on one of my other Medium articles, and we were talking there about desires, so that's why the focus in this article was on desires.
Great article. I wonder if these followers of the law of attraction realize that say if someone had desires that would be regarded as sick or evil, would the person with those desires be regarded by the believers as being justified in working towards fulfilling those desires since to them the universe responds to your thoughts.
ReplyDeleteExactly! As I said in the article, it looks like the reason it's called a "secret law of attraction" is to capitalize on the amorality of scientific language. This anthropocentric "law" has to be amoral because its true function is to justify Western consumerism.
Delete