If you’re a regular reader of this blog, you know that I don’t shy away from the tough questions. I’ve talked about Religion, Jesus’ crucifixion, Cursing, and have argued in favor of Lust, Anger and Shamelessness. My only rule is that questions must be asked respectfully and in the spirit of actually wanting clarification (instead of by someone just looking for an argument).
A couple of weeks ago, I was contacted by Winston Wu, a fellow blogger, who had written a post entitled Debunking the Law of Attraction and “Thoughts Create Reality” Religion. In that post, he challenges LOA teachers such as Dr. Wayne Dyer to explain and address some fundamental questions about the Law of Attraction, which he claims no LOA teacher has given a direct answer to, so far. I found his questions valid and genuine. Unfortunately, a lot of bullshit has been spread about the Law of Attraction, and a lot of the claims that Winston takes issue with are actually the result of a fundamental lack of understanding of how LOA works. If I was a fighting man, I’d take issue with these claims myself.
At the end of his post, Winston poses 15 questions which he has not found an answer for. Well, Winston, Challenge Accepted! Booya! This post will be divided into 4 parts, with parts 2, 3 & 4 being dedicated to the questions themselves.
Setting the stage
In today’s post, I’d like to clarify some things and set the stage. I’d like to explain why I’m answering a skeptic’s questions and where I’m coming from. I’m not here to convince anyone of anything. I don’t believe that there is only one “truth”. Each person has their own truth, and each one is valid from that person’s perspective. I believe that trying to prove LOA to someone is a little bit like trying to prove that God exists. They’re either going to be open to it or not. Either view is ok by me, but that’s not, generally, the case for the “skeptics”. This is why I don’t normally get into discussions about LOA with people who aren’t at least a little bit open to the possibility of it actually being real – they can’t hear me and don’t want to. Again, I’m ok with that. I have no need for anyone to agree with me. I just don’t enjoy futile arguments that don’t lead to increased clarity on either side.
I can’t PROVE to EVERYONE beyond a doubt that LOA is real, and I would never try to. This series isn’t written for those who think the Law of Attraction is the brainchild of an LSD trip, but rather for those who feel a resonance with it, know there’s something there, and essentially would like to believe in it, but can’t make sense of some of the claims out there.
And although I’m not trying to prove anything here, I would like to address the question of lack of scientific proof, as Winston mentioned it in his post and many others have repeatedly used this argument (lack of scientific proof that thoughts create reality) to claim that the Law of Attraction doesn’t work.
If LOA really does work, how would science prove it?
Just for a moment, imagine that everything I teach is fact and that our vibrations create our reality (this is a little bit different from saying that our thoughts create our reality, as the latter can be taken very literally and will lead to a lot of the misunderstandings that Winston points out in his blog post. Our vibrations are made up of our thoughts and beliefs, those we are fully aware of and those we are not. To use different words, our vibration is made up of both our conscious and subconscious. The explanation of the process or manifestation is way beyond what’s possible in a blog post, which is why I packed it into a book. You can download it for free HERE).
Your vibration, in essence, creates a filter that allows only certain experiences into your reality and excludes others. This means that if you take two scientists – one who believes that the earth revolves around the sun and another who does not, and both of their vibrations fully line up with those experiences, then the first scientist will find a way to prove that the Earth actually does revolve around the sun. The second scientist is not a match to that experience and so his filter will not allow him to realize this point of view. He may not be present on the day that the first scientist presents his findings, or, he may simply be unable to believe them. He will find a way to debunk the findings and will simply refuse to see the other scientist’s “truth”. This happens all the time in the scientific community (conflicting studies that are both scientifically valid). And it happened to Galileo, whose discovery, I would argue, was just as much of a game changer then, as LOA is today.
LOA and the scientific process
Before any scientist can prove a theory, he must first HAVE the theory, which is not yet proven. He must have an unproven thought and believe it to be possible. So, the possible theories that a scientist can come up with are going to be directly related to his ability to believe them. If Edison had not been able to conceive of the light bulb, he would not have been able to invent it. So, in essence, scientists come up with theories based on what they have the ability to believe is possible, and then look for evidence that this theory is true. But until they find that proof, they are holding on to an idea that has not yet been proven.
Now, if the new theory is close to what the general populace has come to accept as fact, if the frequencies of the new thought and the general belief aren’t too far apart, then the scientist will most likely be left to find his proof. Others may need to see the proof in order to fully believe it, but they can conceive of the idea that this theory may at least be possible. But, if the new theory is far removed from what’s generally believed, if the frequencies of the new thought and the general belief are far apart, then the scientist will most likely be ridiculed for his outlandish ideas. The further the frequencies are apart, the harder it will be for others to conceive of the new, higher thought.
Basically, scientists must have something akin to faith – they must suspend their disbelief and allow their minds to venture into the impossible, then believe that the impossible could, in fact, be possible and then look for evidence to support it. And yet, this method flies in the face of what we have come to call science – the very idea of believing something that has not been proven and re-proven is unthinkable. Show me the evidence, and then I’ll believe it.
And yet, this is exactly what the Law of Attraction teaches. We must be willing to believe it first and then the evidence will present itself. People who have done this, have found their proof. Those who need to see the evidence first, will have to keep searching until eventually enough people in the world are ready to believe and shift into that energy. Just as eventually, the world was ready to believe that the earth is not flat and does, in fact, revolve around the sun.
Given the parameters that I’ve just laid out, how could one go about proving LOA to someone like the second scientist? Unless he was willing to at least consider the possibility that the theory is valid, he wouldn’t be able to accept that idea, no matter what.
Reaching new levels of understanding en masse takes time
I fully believe that Science and especially Math will prove everything we LOA teachers talk about one day. The way I see it, we are in that time between discovery and general acceptance, similar to the time after Galileo made his discoveries and when the scientific community finally accepted it. But right now, those who really want to understand it, have to be willing to shift into a way of thinking that most of the world doesn’t agree with. They have to be willing to believe the theory, so that the proof can present itself. And depending on where their current belief system is, they may not be able to accomplish this shift, even when presented with “proof”.
My goal in answering Winston’s questions is therefore not to convince anyone of anything, but to present a point of view, a theory or philosophy, if you will, to those who are willing to see the world and everything they’ve ever been taught about how it functions, in a completely different way. If you’re not, I’m totally ok with that.
In the next post, I’m going to answer the first 5 questions from Winston’s post. I have to say, I had so much fun writing this series (I love me some awesome questions!) and I want to extend a huge thank you hug to Winston Wu for mailing me and giving me the opportunity to play like this. Of course, I attracted him and his questions, and y’all probably did, too (this blog is becoming more and more of a co-creation every day), so I guess I’ve got a whole lot of hugging to do. I shall now do the happy dance. It’s going to be a fun ride.
Please share your thoughts in the comments!