Re: [UUPoly-L] Rational skepticism (was:"law" of attraction)

["Michael Rios" <earthfather@cfnc.us>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Desmond Ravenstone

> 
> My own "bottom-line" question about the "law of attraction" is that its
> proponents don't show any proof, and even refuse to provide it.  It's one
> thing to say that motivation plays a factor in one's efforts, and another
> to insist that just believing things will happen makes them so.

And of course, anytime it doesn't happen, either you haven't been patient
enough, or you aren't *really* a true believer-- you're not doing it right,
somehow.  The entire thing is set up to be untestable.

There is also a certain "pyramid scheme" element to this.

If two people want the same thing (that can't be shared), and both follow
the law of attraction, what then?  If two men want a monogamous relationship
with the same woman, and both follow the law of attraction faithfully, what
happens?  If both Obama and McCain followed the law of attraction (LOA), who
wins?

Pyramid schemes only work when not very many people are involved.  Once a
large number of people participate, the scheme no longer works.  In this
case, contradictions arise when more people believe in it.  In other words,
if *everyone* started to practice LOA, no one would have an advantage
anymore, and anything that was a finite resource would be just as
unobtainable.  So LOA might work for improving your health (my getting
healthier doesn't make it harder for you to do so), but would be useless for
winning political office, most competitive awards, gaining new customers
(since your competitors would be doing the same), etc.

Michael Rios