The Science of Law of Attraction Part 1
Is there such a thing as "The science"?
Intro to My Love of Science
I was always great with math and science class. I skipped a year of math after taking a test in junior high so I got placed in a class with others my age who also skipped that year. Because of that, we ended up having basically the same classmates all throughout junior & high school. In high school, I took an Advanced Placement (AP) Calculus test and because of my score, I could have skipped some classes in college. I remember doing my math problems at home and really enjoying it. Yes, I enjoyed my math homework. I thought of them as puzzles to be figured out like someone would tackle a crossword puzzle in the newspaper. Except math problems were better because you knew you were right if you were. You could double-check your work and be certain.
In high school, it was also recommended that I get put in the AP Chemistry class. Basically, anywhere in science and math classes, I excelled. By the way, there were plenty of girls in my class in addition to myself, so I never understood that thing about girls not being into or smart enough for these types of classes. No one around me talked like that. I took a course in Logic in college and loved that too.
Follow the Science?
I am simply a logical person and I love the scientific method. This is why it bugged me so much that people were saying, “Follow the science” in 2020-2022 when I was listening to scientists discuss studies who disagreed with other scientists. I thought both sides of this argument have scientists who studied the same sorts of courses disagreeing with each other.
One side had nothing to lose because they agreed with what everyone else on TV & the federal agencies was saying. The other side was being threatened with losing their medical license, and basically their livelihood. The people who had a lot to lose for speaking up still were still speaking up which gave them an edge of believability for me. It showed they really believed in what they were saying. You have to have a lot of evidence on your side if you’re going to disagree with other respectable people who are willing to risk their & their family’s livelihood and reputations to warn people about something.
What I saw from the mainstream side was propaganda techniques and bullying rather than logically discussing anything the other side had to say. They screwed their chance for me to believe them. If you have logic and actual scientific studies on your side then debate people logically like men. Don’t act like authoritarian cry bullies.
The Law of Attraction Demonized
Demonization
People who don’t agree with the law of attraction (as they’ve heard it) will also simply mock those who do. They won’t discuss it in logical debates. They simply make fun of the belief without even knowing what the belief truly is.
Different languages
I can’t fault them for not knowing what the belief truly is. There are many different takes and lots of different terms that people may not exactly know the definition of. If you follow Esther Hicks and her “Abraham” work you will see much different language or terms used than if you follow Dr. Joe Dispenza or if you watch Dr. Hew Len talk about cleaning.
But I’ve watched and listened to all of those and can interchange terms. I could be somewhat of a law of attraction interpreter. They’re talking about basically the same thing but, yes, widely different terms. What Dr. Joe Dispenza calls a habit, Esther “Abraham” Hicks would call momentum. What Dr. Joe Dispenza would call “space,” Esther would call “the vortex” and Dr. Hew Len would call “Zero.”
Different Faith Levels
Beyond the fact that every person talking about the law of attraction may have a different way of describing things, they also struggle with faith (as everyone does). This makes it so that they will struggle with walking the talk. They’ll say they believe, but won’t actually act as if they do. When people see them they’ll, rightfully, say they’re being hypocritical. I wrote about some of that hypocrisy before.
Different Dimensional Perspectives
Then, people who talk about the law of attraction will usually speak from different perspectives, confusing any onlooker or eavesdropper. Talking about something that went supposedly “wrong,” like getting dumped or fired as a great thing might sound odd to someone else. But, with this belief, from a higher perspective (in the long run), everything is working out for you. If someone is stuck thinking one-dimensionally, it is considered rude to tell them that this thing that they’re really upset about was actually a good thing.
Demonized Doesn’t Mean True
I’m aware of the fallacy that you should not believe something solely because people are demonizing it. There has to be more evidence for me to believe in it. But I have been in search of the truth on many subjects and have found people have a very strong reaction to things that are true when it goes against their very deeply-held beliefs.
Demonized Does Mean it Conflicts With Strong Beliefs
I have said I don’t believe in the trinity and got called a heretic and witch. I have said I don’t believe in Paul’s supposed apostleship and have been called a heretic for that also. Of course, being against masks or vaccines would get you called many names too, like science-denier, or COVID-denier. And these reactions all came from the same emotion, in my experienced opinion, fear.
When people are afraid and believe something will save them, if you try to claim it won’t, they will likely demonize you. This likely has to do with the drama triangle as I write about on my other substack. They see themselves as “victims,” and believe there is a “savior” and if you say it’s not or there is some faulty logic there, they will see you within their drama triangle perspective and label you as a “persecutor.” They’re one-dimensionally thinking, seeing things in the “triangle” and you’re thinking outside the “triangle,” from another dimensional vantage point, so they don’t understand you.
No Such Thing as “The Science”
To say there is a stable thing such as “the science” is laughable to anyone who has studied science and isn’t involved in cult-like thinking. Even Grammarly has a red line under it telling me there’s no such thing. We do experiments and find out more information over time. We all know that there is a phenomenon where the researchers can affect the data. This is why many do double-blind studies. The researchers should not know what subjects are getting what treatments to not influence them. Not all studies do this though.
Today we also have some people looking at studies and claiming opposite conclusions based on the same studies. Just having the data isn’t enough, you need to interpret it. You know those people who say vaccines are safe and effective? They wonder why people won’t take them. You would think, if they were correct, it would be easy to show them with data in studies. But, what they found out when studying vaccine hesitancy, was the hesitant were highly educated and were correctly interpreting the primary literature.
Besides the fact that studies can have problems, we also have the problem that once a study is out, someone interprets it (correctly or incorrectly), and the interpretation is what we hear.
In school, I was taught to go back to the original source and see if the original source says what the interpretation says. Nowadays they want you to ignore that advice because they think you’re stupid. Most people who think a “vaccine hesitant” person is hesitant, believe that person to be naive or an idiot who trusts in the wrong people. They see them as a victim of misinformation. They have likely never heard the quote from the study that I mentioned above.
People who don’t want to use vaccines are intelligent people actually looking at the data and not blindly trusting the interpreters of the data. My hypothesis is that the people who do blindly trust the so-called “experts” (the interpreters of data) do so because they believe themselves to be too stupid to interpret it themselves and they project that stupidity onto others. Or, they’re too lazy and want to just trust someone and not waste time researching.
If you’re reading this, you are likely a curious one who is not stuck in that one-dimensional thinking. You likely know there are myriad problems with trusting studies and scientists blindly. I will also mention they may have motivated reasoning which can lead them to discard extremely relevant information or data points as “irrelevant” in their views.
I’m being warned by Substack this is getting long, so I think I will split this up into 2 parts. I will edit in the link for part 2 as soon as it’s up.