Dealing With Woo-Woo

Have you noticed that Law of Attraction and Personal Development experts from time to time like to remind us that these subjects need not be considered (here comes the term) “woo-woo”?

Many aren’t comfortable with things they think are “far out,” “New Age” or “spooky,” so these experts would like to separate their work from such a stigma.

Here’s the thing:  in attending several LOA and Personal Development gatherings and meeting many individuals associated with them, I’ve found that plenty of them are, well, kind of woo-woo.  Of course many aren’t, but you don’t have to look far to find people in loose, flowing clothing (sometimes even tye-dyed,) wearing crystals, passing around their aura photo, talking about their Spirit Guides and latest emotionally charged psychic reading.

Don’t misunderstand:  I tend to like and get along well with these folks, often finding them interesting conversationalists.  Further, I went to a psychic a couple of times, don’t necessarily think things like crystals or aura photos are crazy, and I kinda like loose, flowing clothes myself.  But I’m convinced that for some the LOA is simply an extension of the 60s & 70s hippie movement, and they seem shocked when many of us don’t fall in line with things they consider clearly connected.

For example, for a few months last year I met with a group that was studying Kabbalah, the discipline and school of thought that seeks to define the nature of the universe and the human being, the nature and purpose of existence, and various other questions.  We were a diverse bunch, but one lady in her late forties was what I would call particularly woo-woo.  She was very touchy-feely and gyrated as she spoke about mystical, groovy things.  Once when someone began to question a certain personal pattern of thought, this woman raised her hand emphatically and said, “Hold it!  That sounds like a lot of judgment to me.” She tilted her head to the side dramatically, whispering, “No more judgment.  No more judgment.”

I’d had it up to here with this chick.  Everyone else just seemed stunned by her, so I spoke

up.  I explained that while I could understand that being harshly judgmental of ourselves and others might be counterproductive, that didn’t mean we couldn’t come to certain conclusions about what worked for us and what didn’t.  What, after all, was the purpose of this study group if we couldn’t form judgments for ourselves about what was and was not beneficial?  And might her objection not be considered “judgmental” itself?

I was listening to an Abraham-Hicks recording some months ago and heard a participant ask Abraham about how we should conduct ourselves in view of “global warming.”  Her question about this subject, which tends to blame humans for the fact that the earth has in recent decades (but not the past decade) been experiencing a warming trend, seemed to suggest this perspective was universally accepted.  Yes it must be a foregone conclusion that someone as wise as Abraham, a group of ancient, non-physical entities, would of course agree with this position.  What was Abraham’s reply?

“For those of you worried about “global warming,” we ask, Who burned the fossil fuels that melted the Ice Age?”

I did not have video of this, but can only imagine the reaction some people had to it.  Abraham expressed what I (and a growing number of others) believe:  that our planet’s temperature has always been in a state of continuous change and that the statistical blip people are all worked up over barely registers on history’s scale.  But this is a shocking apostasy for those who have created a religion around “climate change.”

While I don’t intend to make politics an important part of Law of Attraction Success Stories, I have wanted to make a distinction between this universal law and the politics some tend to associate with it.  I have come to understand why, in “The Secret,” Joe Vitale emphasizes that everything in our life is something we ourselves have created.

“This is one of the hardest concepts to get but once accepted its life-transforming. This is part of the overall giant secret here.” -Joe Vitale

My point is that looking to ourselves–as opposed to (for instance) the government–for our well-being is one part of taking responsibility for everything that happens to us.  Therefore, for me, any effort to have government assume a more important role in my life is an attempt to escape responsibility.

You and I might disagree about a few things in this regard, and I’m well aware that there are lots of “responsible” people found throughout the political spectrum.  But while “woo woo” is usually pretty harmless, I can’t help but notice some of the political positions taken by many who lean in that direction.  Positions that in the name of “peace, love & kindness” seek to transfer responsibility for one’s well-being from the self to the government.

But if like me you are a believer in the Law of Attraction–and want to improve your life through a better understanding of it–I encourage you to avoid supporting any effort that involves your reliance on government or anything other than yourself.

On My Long Departure

It’s been fifteen months since my last post.  I think I’m now in a position to understand why I stopped for so long.

I felt the need to challenge myself on the entire subject of the Law of Attraction.  While I had no trouble accepting it myself, it now appears that I was bothered by those who argue against it, and it resulted in cognitive dissonance.

Cognitive Dissonance:  Anxiety that results from simultaneously holding contradictory or otherwise incompatible attitudes or beliefs.

Those who dismiss the LOA say two things about it:  (1) it hasn’t been scientifically proven, therefore (2) it should be classified along with four-leaf clovers and unicorns as superstitious mysticism.

During my time away and while exploring and reading, I noticed my attention being brought to the truth that (indeed) “some people see the glass as half-full, others as half-empty.” And I admit to being affected by those who frequently dismiss things as hokum.  Their motives are often righteous, and if it weren’t for those who challenge

information we might still believe the earth is flat and supported by a gigantic turtle and elephants.

But it’s impossible to avoid that, while critical thinking has often been vindicated, it is just as often found to be short-sighted and false.  In paying attention to this subject throughout my life, I’ve come to the conclusion that some people are chronic and opportunistic faultfinders.  My theory is that being found a fool is their greatest fear, and in being critical of most everything they are thus playing it safe.

“New and stirring things are belittled because if they are not belittled, the humiliating question arises, “Why then are you not taking part in them?” - H.G. Wells

When investigating the LOA, there have been numerous controlled experiments that demonstrate our thoughts (in the very least) have an impact on our reality.  Imagine that in forty years a properly controlled series of experiments and subsequent studies prove, to the satisfaction of critics, that the LOA is scientific fact.  In the meantime how am I to lead my life?  Must I really wait until all the critics reach consensus before coming to my own conclusions?

Example:  I’ve never seen a ghost, and thus can’t say for sure they’re real.  But I knew a family in Michigan who told me of a ghost they’d frequently see in their home.  Each family member had seen it multiple times; they report it was a dwarf who would sometimes walk about and even sit down at their dining room table.  While they can’t really prove to me they saw a ghost, shall they allow my lack of proof to doubt themselves?  Shall they allow the fact that most scientists scoff at the existence of ghosts to dismiss their own experience?

And so this topic collides full-force with the realization I came to six years ago.  The one that led me to challenge and reject my family’s religion though they shun me to this day for it.  The one that led me to start this blog.  As I mention on my “About” page, “people usually accept the reality placed before them by other people.” The question for me now is:  If I can challenge and part ways with those who, in the name of religion, claim to represent The Truth, am I also willing to do so with those who, in the name of science, profess that if they have not proven it it isn’t true?

At age 44, I have yet to find a better worldview than the one that recognizes our thoughts modify our reality.  You don’t have to believe it; neither do most scientists.