User:Tmtoulouse/loa criticism
Criticism points that should be raised[edit]
Science/Medicine[edit]
- Violation of known scientific knowledge
- The use of the term "law"
- Sham quantum physics
- Lack of falsifiability
- "Blame the victim", terminal and mental illness effects
Media[edit]
- Larry King point
- Robert Sapolsky
- Marketing
Cultural[edit]
- LOA popular in cultures that allow people control over their lives
- Money/wealth/greed driven
Criticism section from article[edit]
The Law of Attraction, especially in its less religious contexts, has been criticized for:
- Implying the law has a scientific foundation when no such basis exists.[1]
- The book, The Secret, is criticized for poor methodology and definition of the Law of Attraction by New Thought Practioners.[2]
Criticism of the Law of Attraction comes from other directions as well.
In the mainstream media, talk show hosts such as Larry King have pointed at the sufferings in the world and asked: "If the Universe manifests abundance at a mere thought, why is there so much poverty, starvation, and death?" This theological problem is known as theodicy.
A scathing critique of Bernie Seigel's "Love, Medicine and Miracles," a book that espouses a version of the law of attraction, can be found in Robert Sapolsky's "Why Zebras Don't Get Ulcers." Sapolsky warns that if one believes positive thinking alone can produce incredible change, those unable to produce such change may be seen, or see themselves, as blameworthy.
It has also been pointed out that most of the people discussed in recent books on the subject live in a culture that has paths to allow people to overcome adversity and that the same is not true for much of the world.[1] The same cannot be said of earlier proponents of the Law of Attraction, however, especially those who, like Wallace Wattles (1860–1911), claimed in his book The Science of Getting Rich (1910) to have used the principle to rise from a life of grinding poverty to one of merely comfortable industry.
Scientists are critical of the lack of falsifiability and testability of the claims. All of the evidence is both anecdotal and, because of the self-selecting nature of positive reports, as well as the subjective nature of any results, highly susceptible to misinterpretations like confirmation bias and selection bias.
The few claims by proponents that seem to reference modern scientific theory remain under question. While brainwaves do have an electrical signal, it is unclear what principles of quantum physics behave the way proponents of the Law of Attraction claim.[1] Opponents claim that the use of the term "Law" and the vague references to quantum physics to bridge any unexplained or seemingly implausible effects are hallmark traits of modern pseudoscience.