After being asked by quite a few people about The Secret.tv’s product, here is my take on it. From the beginning, I am stating that this article is not about the actual law of attraction. The formula of the law of attraction is valid and everybody should learn how to use it properly. This article is exclusively about the Secret.tv and the way it presents the law of attraction.

I will point out 7 issues that I’ve considered the most improper ones related to the movie.

1. Strongly emphasized as a way to monetize your subsistence

As it often happens in the personal development field, the law of attraction is taken merely from its pragmatic side. Which in fact shouldn’t be a problem. But it is reduced way too far. Actually it is presented as a direct way to wealth. Nothing more, nothing less. Health gets mentioned, but it is so anemic that you wouldn’t remember that. Yes, it is important to let abundance be present in your life. On the material level too. But the law of attraction is more than a quick solution for monetizing your subsistence. A major oversimplification.

This is how the movie starts. A few people are shown to the audience, presumably main protagonists, and they make affirmations and ask question like this:

1. You can have anything you want!
2. Do you want to be a millionaire?
3. You can have success!
4. What do you really want?

Good questions. Still, cheap appealings to the most basic desires of humans in the present time. Getting rich and getting successful. Who wouldn’t listen to such a promise of a delivering method?

2. The lack of moral considerations

This is my biggest concern related to the presentation of the law of attraction here. Not to mention leaving out spiritual laws, but just the morality concerns should be enough.

It just concludes that you should attract in your life whatever you want. Whatever you’ve been always wanting. If this was a secret before, known only to few, it was because of the awareness regarding the consequences it generates when applied. No allusions to responsibility issues whatsoever. Helping in getting what you want, not helping much in personal development.

3. One’s level of maturity is left out of consideration

The presentation of the law of attraction was brought down to some very basic techniques of persuasion. The most obvious one is the way it is packaged as a secret. Curiosity generates obviously attraction to what they really want to say (sic!).

It all seems like starting from the premise that the audience is by far too immature, childish. They need simple thoughts packaged in simple messages. At the end it turns out to be nothing more than a kitsch. It makes you wonder about the original goal of the producers.

The biggest joke they could come up with was the adventures of a bald guy. At first he has to clean up some elephant shit, but in the end his bike is stolen. Great humor. The LOL of attraction.

4. What about compassion or altruism?

It looks like you should use this law mainly to attract pleasant things. They say, whenever you encounter uncomfortable situations, just change your mood. Learn to switch your mind immediately over to a pleasant and comfortable mood. The word “good” is used here as a synonym for pleasant. Which is also wrong and misleading.

5. It reduces it all to thinking

The law manifests what you’re thinking. “Everything that is happening to you is because of the way you think.” it is stated. Another untrue and misleading suggestion. There are far more circumstances playing a significant role in bringing up events in your life.

It is confusing that they talk about thought manifestation and the law of attraction at the same time. Mixing it all up.

6. Spicing it up with some allusions to ancient teachings

The allusion to the Emerald Tablet of Hermes Trismegistus is completely inappropriate. There is not a word or reference to the law of attraction there. A very incorrect way of artistic actualization. Nauseating.

7. Impudent ways to make suggestions

“It’s hard to swallow.” Finally they got it right.

“If you don’t understand it, it doesn’t mean that you should reject it.” Why are they questioning the freedom of the viewer to see it differently? Why are they trying to convince you at first place?

And it continues like this: “No one knows what electricity is. [... still ...] You can cook a man’s dinner with electricity and you can also cook the man.” Insinuation of not knowing what electricity is. I mean many people have probably absented the physics class, some have not. Hilarious. And why should you cook a man?

I mean really Mr. Proctor, why should anyone cook a man?

In a future posting I will sum up my thoughts on the law of attraction, the actual one. Just to change my mood and hopefully your’s too, to something positive.

Search: