What Death Tells Us About The Law Of Attraction
BY HARV BISHOP
Editor’s note: We are revisiting our inaugural post to celebrate our first anniversary. Mitch Horowitz’s call for New Thought reform drew more than 1,000 social media shares and 2,000 views. Thanks also to the 23,000 people who visited this blog over the last year.
New Thought is in need of a reformation, says author Mitch Horowitz, and the movement can start by remembering that no one gets out of this world alive.
An absolutist view that your thinking creates 100 percent of your reality neglects “that we live under physical limitations. Mortality alone tells us that,” Horowitz explains. “Physical laws will eventually result in our final demise. We leave these bodies. These bodies decay.”
His newest book, “One Simple Idea: How Positive Thinking Reshaped Modern Life,” has just been released in a revised and expanded 2016 paperback edition. His monthly column, Real Positivity, appears in Science of Mind: Guide for Spiritual Living magazine
“I think that we all need to take a very long, serious look at the Law of Attraction,” says Horowitz, “or whatever term one wants to apply to the idea that the mind is
this overall mental super law. I think we live under many laws and forces of which
the mind is one. And that is extraordinary enough. I think New Thought has
defined itself too narrowly. It is quite possible, and I never encountered anything
that contradicts this in New Thought, that the mind can be one force among many forces.”
Too often, he explains, he encounters New Thought neophytes and adherents who feel blamed for illness and other misfortune in their lives.
“New Thought can too reflexively and too narrowly hold the individual responsible for everything that happens to that person. So there can be this doctrinal narrowness that grows out of the commitment to a single mental super law.
Rather than seeing New Thought as presenting the individual with one possible cause among others, there is the leap to the idea that all [experience] must come back to the mind as a root cause. I’m not sure that’s true. I think we need to take a very hard second look at that.
Blaming the Victim
“The critique of New Thought within the mainstream, as far as the mainstream pays attention to it, is that it engages in victim blaming. Now mainstream critics often have a shallow degree of context with New Thought and they leap to that conclusion too quickly, but it does not mean that they are entirely wrong. It doesn’t mean we can afford to discount their views.”
A rigid either/or view of thought as the only cause of experience can blind people to New Thought’s wisdom, Horowitz says.
“We are raised in the western world to believe that life is largely a material affair. We believe in visible cause and effect, things that are repeatable, that can be measured. The New Thought point of view stands in opposition to that. New Thought suggests that there are these undercurrents to life that we can’t necessarily see, feel, measure or place under an actuarial table but that may be even more significant than those things that we can place on an actuarial table.
“I believe that our ideas of the [human] mind are going to continually deepen and expand, not contract. I believe that because of my intimate personal experience and testimony amassed over many different generations and the ever-deepening mystery of studies into quantum physics, relativity, the placebo effect and neuroplasticity.
“We need a reformation within New Thought. We need to consider the insights amassed over the last 150 years. The time frame from mental healing to current expressions of New Thought are deeply valuable. They contain great truths. They are being validated in science and psychology and medicine, but they are incomplete and we perhaps haven’t paid attention to the possibility that the mind can be one exquisitely important force among other forces.”
For other interviews with Horowitz in this series:
Part 2 and Part 2 continued: How collective consciousness does and does not influence our lives
Part 3: Can the Law of Attraction account for tragedy and misfortune?
Part 4: The ironic historical accident of sorts that created the belief there are no accidents
Part 5: The Future of New Thought: What works, what needs reform
ENTER TO WIN A FREE TIM BOTTA INSPIATIONAL ERNEST HOLMES PRINT CREATED ESPECIALLY FOR OUR HARVBISHOP.COM FIRST ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATION
How to Win Your Print: The talented North Carolina-based artist and educator Tim Botta pays tribute to Ernest Holmes, founder of Religious Science, with this new inspirational portrait. Email Tim at bottaprints@gmail.com by July 23 to be entered. The random drawing will take place July 24, 2016. Tim will award two free prints and also gift runners up with 25 percent discounts (and other readers with 10 percent discounts) at his art sales site.
Interesting. I believe in science and find it completely compatible with my spiritual beliefs. I also don’t believe science is infallible. One need only visit the diet section of any bookstore to realize that science has a bit further to go on many topics (yes, I am winking as I write this). Seriously though, what we don’t know can take your breath away when you dare to focus your attention on that.
I love this quote but Rupert Sheldrake,
“It’s almost as if science said, “Give me one free miracle, and from there the entire thing will proceed with a seamless, causal explanation.”’ The one free miracle was the sudden appearance of all the matter and energy in the universe, with all the laws that govern it.”
Take consciousness itself, for example. Do we produce in our brains or are we “in it”? Is this question even answerable on grander scale?
Good points Rob. Scientism- a fundamentalist view that nothing exists outside that which can be measured- is a real problem. Such science fundamentalists succeeded in having a TED talk by Sheldrake pulled though it can still be seen on You Tube.
Hi Bob,
I see you posted this to the original page for this article. It is beautifully stated so I’m re-posting it here on the newer version of the article.
Hi there. I have been a licensed Religious Science Practitioner since 1991, and have taught various classes in Science of Mind ever since. The term I (and many others) use for the kind of fundamentalist thinking as described above is RSBS! And the biggest reason I have refused to even watch the movie, “The Secret”. The Law of Attraction is only ONE of the laws that founder, Ernest Holmes talks about in his teachings. He also clearly stated that we need to be “Open at the Top”, but not, as my teacher, Doris Jones said many times, “Splitting apart at the seams”.
She also taught us that no one, absolutely NO ONE can EVER know another’s consciousness! Never. We can barely come to understand our own. Life is filled with Life, ever expanding, moving, changing it its appearance although always the same at its center.
We need to teach all of this at our centers, in our classes, in our writings. We need to absolutely remove ourselves from what can be called, “New Though Sin and Guilt”. We have absolutely no right to ever ask anyone an ignorant question like, “What did you do to attract that??”, or “Why did your consciousness bring THAT about in your life?”. These are questions that we can surely ask ourselves in order to deepen our understanding of our own life process, but even then this type of questioning usually does not produce any useful new information. What we can and should ask are questions like, “Is there any gift that we can see in all of this?”, or “Is there something here to explore, discover, learn for myself?”, or “Where is the presence and power of Love in this situation?”
If a question empowers, it’s appropriate. If a question belittles, or causes more fear, resentment, guilt, or shame, it’s not. At least it’s not appropriate in the realm of New Thought teaching and coaching.
This is all written spur of the moment and stream of thinking.. so I apologize for lack of clarity, or inconsistencies or confusion. But there ya are! Love to you and us all! Bob Bercaw, RScP, Awakened Heart Spiritual Center, Wilmington, DE
I intended to enter the Tim Botta contest for one of his charming portraits, but find no path to it. His sales site indicates he is not doing any contests at the time. I wonder how best to go about taking part. Many thanks and best wishes on your very engaging blog. GL
Hi Greg,
For this offer email Tim directly at bottaprints@gmail.com to be entered for the drawing.
Best,
Harv
Thanks! GL
Harvey, Maybe one of the Key Essences of New Thought is the “double entendre” of the Golden Rule, where the lawyer/scribe answers Jesus by saying in Luke 10:25-28 (ESV): “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.” THE KEY HERE is “As Yourself” and Love GOD. Thus, if you love yourself greatly and love GOD/SpiritoftheUniverse, you may love others more easily in the same manner. One of the SECRETS of the Law of Attractions is to RAISE your vibration, build inner love and grow self regard. With Willingness, we/you LEARN to LOVE YOURSELF and treat yourself with respect. People who hate themselves tend to hate others and thus many problems of crime and mental health flow from that. After reading great writers such as Napoleon Hill, Wattles, Haanel, Allen, Larson, Dyer, Tolle, etc. and many others, you find that they say, take care of yourself, mind your business, build yourself up. Do all these things for the benefit of self and family and humanity. In essence, social justice begins on the inside most of the time. I could go on, but being sustainable as a spiritually competent being is a selfish act that benefits all others in your orb. You may do this spiritually and some may need the help of a coach, therapist, priest, licensed professional, or doctor to assist, but mental and spiritual health can be achieved by most anyone who earnestly wants it. — Does New Thought need to be innovated? Well, maybe that already happens naturally with new writers from Science of Mind and other new superstars in the literary arts. What do you think?
I don’t disagree with anything you have said here George. The Dalai Lama has said part of why we engage in compassionate acts is that it feels good and improves our health. Someone burned out, angry and bitter has less opportunity to be of service to others. I would modify your use of the word selfish to say enlightened self-interest. We are a mix of motivations and desires so I differ from those who say we are wholly selfish or wholly altruistic. Where New Thought reform is needed- and you may disagree with Mitch and I on this- is in elevating what Mitch calls an overarching mental super law; saying that our minds dot every i and cross every t of our life experience. Mitch would say we are influenced by multiple laws, including physical, and our minds and thoughts are one influence on our experience. Good questions. I’ll be writing more on this topic on the blog next week.
Loved this–although I have to disagree that no one gets out of this world alive. EVERYONE gets out alive. NoBODY does. 😉
Also–I’d like to extend belated anniversary wishes and gratitude for your work. It is definitely time for a “Newer Thought” that places the spiritualization of materialism in proper perspective. New Thought churches are full of people who keep doing the same thing, expecting a different result.
They blindly embrace the claim that they are in total control of their outcomes, and that the Universe is conspiring to deliver what they desire. They consider this implausible notion as “positive thought.” But there’s nothing positive about a lie–or New Thought’s Law of Distraction.
Followers are given a formula for “success” in creating things that have no eternal value. Their attention is focused away from the True Self, the Immortal Self, the Divine Self to the human body costume the Self is temporarily wearing and to the physical world the Self is temporarily visiting.
If they follow all the steps in the books and the workshops and the sermons, and things don’t happen as desired, they’re told that one split second of doubt or negativity altered the outcome. The lesson here is that hours, days, weeks or months of positive thought can be annihilated by a millisecond of negative thought.
So they try again, believing that they did something wrong. They never question the veracity of the “principle” or philosophy. But as Fox taught, there’s no such thing as undemonstrated understanding.
Thank you for your efforts to help us understand.
Thanks for your kind words Patricia. Beautifully articulated critique of the law of distraction. Be sure to check out Maryjane Osa’s piece on unanswered prayers and the wisdom of Horatio Dresser.
Thanks! Unanswered prayer is one of my favorite topics! Just yesterday, I was cautioning a friend on Facebook about the implications of thanking friends who had answered her prayer request when her husband fell ill quite suddenly. I told her that she didn’t want to hurt the feelings of those who had prayed and had not received their desired outcome. I urged against positioning God as capricious and unjust.
Luckily, she was open-minded and familiar with my “common sense spirituality” philosophy and thanked me–even though others on her timeline were still ranting, “Praise God!” LOL
I will hunt down Maryjane Osa’s piece right now–and probably will share, share, share!