tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19322660.post7811945811072260574..comments2024-03-18T00:05:07.328-07:00Comments on The Puritan's Sword: A Biblical Examination of Philosophical, Theological, and Political Trends: "The Secret" Book Review (Part I)R.S. Ladwighttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13487404072546513179noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19322660.post-21497640217433959272007-04-26T22:51:00.000-07:002007-04-26T22:51:00.000-07:00"Don't you think you're jumping the gun on this, B...<I>"Don't you think you're jumping the gun on this, Bob? Have you actually tried The Secret to see if it works? Do you honestly think it's intellectually responsible to write a process like this off so completely without seeing if it's correct? A bit dogmatic, maybe?"</I><BR/><BR/>LOL, yeah I suppose I should "try" it eh? I was going to get to that line actually because I think that would be the main reply to any criticism to the theory. But I think the theory is safe. No matter what the results it will be confirmation of the theory because it is so subjective, so by simply "trying" it you really embrace it.<BR/><BR/><I>"Ever have one of those moments where you smell something you don't immediately recognize, and you're a little unsure as to whether it smells delicious or nauseating? The authors and producers of "The Secret" have found a way to perpetuate this stench in literary form, insisting all along that it's delicious, when it's really emanating from a rotting cow-chip that's been shaped into a likeness of the Virgin Mary and is being touted as a cure for leprosy. I just came up with that analogy, but I kind of like it."</I><BR/><BR/>Oh man this is too much, that is hilarious Uber, soda all over the key board!<BR/><BR/><I>"Did you ever catch the film What The Bleep Do We Know?. I'm curious as to whether or not the makers of these productions know one another. They smack of the same kind of facts-to-the-wind-just-think-about -it-hard-enough-and-you'll-believe salesmanship. <BR/><BR/>They both give you experts who aren't really experts to sell you a philosophy that is based on smoke, mirrors, and a whole lot of bullshit. I haven't done much research on The Secret yet, but I suspect that it's as full of holes as What the Bleep. Certainly, most of the fantastic claims made in What the Bleep are easily refuted and/or the results of deeply flawed methods. But they've got talking heads endorsing them, and that's what matters."</I><BR/><BR/>No I haven't seen it but my philosphy prof recommended it, we did talk about it a good bit though. I think you are right though with the secret, no matter what there is an ad hoc rescue even if you test it...the theory/method is perfectly safe. Also with the "air of expertise" and the numerous appeals to authority througout the book it really is rediculous if you read it. I wavered between just laughing and gasping for breath as I realized these people were serious. I mean they honestly want to throw Einstein in there and say he was a master of the secret.<BR/><BR/><I>"One of the first criticisms of the book you make concerns the "cold, pitiless universe" and how The Secret explains the reasons for the tragedies of the world in terms of negative people attracting negative things to themselves. I agree that it sounds cold and heartless, but above that, I think that the authors ultimately don't want their readers extrapolating that far."</I><BR/><BR/>You're are right, most of the people reading the book are just in it for a get rich quick scheme, it is not the authors intention to get them to think too deeply about what embracing the secret will really entail as far as a worldview. As I said they really lay that one on the reader later when they say "You are God". <BR/><BR/><I>"You mention the conclusions one must reach by following the philosophy to its logical end, but do you believe that they expect their readers to do any of that?"</I><BR/><BR/>That's a great question. I assumed from the outset that these folks writing this stuff were just a bunch of charlatans trying to bilk folks of their money and were using Oprah (the most powerful woman in the world) to do just that. But as I said in the post they make these very strong statements throughout the book like how ALL suffering is a result of negative thoughts, things like this lead me to think that these folks are very serious and want their readers to take their message seriously as a worldview.<BR/><BR/><I>"Bored middle-class Oprah's Book Club Readers everywhere won't be thinking past their fights with their spouses, their trips to the dentist, or their stock options when they wonder about drawing bad stuff to themselves. The creators of "The Secret" want it this way, because anyone who does follow the philosophy to its logical end will simply find it absurd."</I><BR/><BR/>You are probably right, I think for the most part people will embrace it superficially and not really understand what it all entails and just try to get babes and cash. However, I think there are those who will take this very seriously. I have know many hippy types who practice "the Secret" long before it was called "the Secret" in order to score drugs, concert tickets, rides, and girls. They were quite alright with declaring that they were "god" and could manifest anything. Of course they did not carry this to it's logical end, however they were dead serious when they spoke like this and would get angry when I would start pointing out the obvious flaws in their worldview.<BR/><BR/><I>"I think that they include some sort of token mention of horrific tragedies so that the reader can feel as though the authors have covered all the bases. Once they're convinced of the authors' reliability, they're free to ignore the hilariously and poorly reasoned reality of the actual conclusions."</I><BR/><BR/>Maybe. I just think that the main author at least really belives this stuff, she is wrestling with the outcomes of her worldview. But after all people being destroyed by cancer is a very minor point of the book the main portion is focused on self aggrandization and the pursuit of material pleasures. I really did in the post quote ALL they had to say about suffering. It was a very minute point (in their eyes), something they don't want you to give too much thought to.<BR/><BR/><I>"To be honest, I don't know that the "The Secret", on its own, is any danger to society."</I><BR/><BR/>I agree, it is only playing on what is already the prevail-ent mood of the society, a sort of hedonism and self worship.<BR/><BR/><I>I mentioned What The Bleep Do We Know? as just one example of what I believe is <B>an emerging trend of utilitarian-hedonistic spirituality.</B></I><BR/><BR/>I really think this is on the money. That is an excellent assesment of what is going on with these new spiritualities. This is why we hear so much talk of "my truth" and "this is what <I>works</I> for me", it is indeed utilitarian and hedonistic.R.S. Ladwighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13487404072546513179noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19322660.post-88577126104502799612007-04-26T10:37:00.000-07:002007-04-26T10:37:00.000-07:00Don't you think you're jumping the gun on this, Bo...Don't you think you're jumping the gun on this, Bob? Have you actually <I>tried</I> The Secret to see if it works? Do you honestly think it's intellectually responsible to write a process like this off so completely without seeing if it's correct? A bit dogmatic, maybe?<BR/><BR/>...hope you weren't taking me seriously on that one. I should say straight up that while I disagree with some of the elements of your approach (as I will, naturally), I also believe that the book is a steaming heap of opportunism. Ever have one of those moments where you smell something you don't immediately recognize, and you're a little unsure as to whether it smells delicious or nauseating? The authors and producers of "The Secret" have found a way to perpetuate this stench in literary form, insisting all along that it's delicious, when it's really emanating from a rotting cow-chip that's been shaped into a likeness of the Virgin Mary and is being touted as a cure for leprosy. I just came up with that analogy, but I kind of like it. <BR/><BR/>Did you ever catch the film <I>What The Bleep Do We Know?</I>. I'm curious as to whether or not the makers of these productions know one another. They smack of the same kind of facts-to-the-wind-just-think-about -it-hard-enough-and-you'll-believe salesmanship. They both give you experts who aren't really experts to <I>sell</I> you a philosophy that is based on smoke, mirrors, and a whole lot of bullshit. I haven't done much research on <I>The Secret</I> yet, but I suspect that it's as full of holes as <I>What the Bleep</I>. Certainly, most of the fantastic claims made in <I>What the Bleep</I> are easily refuted and/or the results of deeply flawed methods. But they've got talking heads endorsing them, and that's what matters. Unless you wait until the end and find out that the majority of their "experts" are actually not experts at all... or that the producers of the documentary are part of a religious organization that promotes the worship of "Ramtha", a 40,000 year old Atlantean warrior who is being channeled through a heavily made-up housewife. This same housewife also happens to be the most prominently interviewed figure in the documentary, and does the most expounding of their particular philosophy. Imagine that. Praise Ramtha. Really, if you haven't seen the documentary, don't. The message is trite, the acting is poor, and once you know it's B.S., the experience is wholly unsatisfying.<BR/><BR/>But on to the review.<BR/><BR/>One of the first criticisms of the book you make concerns the "cold, pitiless universe" and how The Secret explains the reasons for the tragedies of the world in terms of negative people attracting negative things to themselves. I agree that it sounds cold and heartless, but above that, I think that the authors ultimately don't want their readers extrapolating that far. You mention the conclusions one must reach by following the philosophy to its logical end, but do you believe that they expect their readers to do any of that? I suspect that what they <I>want</I> their readers to think about is how, when Judy, the stay-at-home mom who loves Oprah and thinks of herself as "spiritual but not religious" stomped around the house in a bad mood last Friday, she wound up stubbing her toe and dropping her favourite teacup. "Crap!" she'd exclaim, and then, drawing on her newly acquired "Secret", "I've been in a bad mood all afternoon, it's no wonder I've attracted all these negative things to myself." And Judy, in her newly-acquired but not-so-well-researched wisdom, would then go and drop $40 for the book and then $500 for a three week feel-good seminar with Michael Beckwith, or whatever follow-up material will inevitably be on sale from the success of this trash.<BR/><BR/>Bored middle-class Oprah's Book Club Readers everywhere won't be thinking past their fights with their spouses, their trips to the dentist, or their stock options when they wonder about drawing bad stuff to themselves. The creators of "The Secret" want it this way, because anyone who <I>does</I> follow the philosophy to its logical end will simply find it absurd. I think that they include some sort of token mention of horrific tragedies so that the reader can feel as though the authors have covered all the bases. Once they're convinced of the authors' reliability, they're free to ignore the hilariously and poorly reasoned reality of the actual conclusions.<BR/><BR/>To be honest, I don't know that the "The Secret", on its own, is any danger to society. If it stood alone in its tactics and message, it would be easy to laugh it off as another ridiculous (albeit brilliantly marketed) get-rich-quick scam. But, unfortunately, it's not on its own. I mentioned <I>What The Bleep Do We Know?</I> as just one example of what I believe is an emerging trend of utilitarian-hedonistic spirituality. Many North Americans, disenfranchised or just plain unconvinced by strict Christianity but equally unwilling to expend the energy to explore what that means, are easily swayed by new, slick, and heavily produced "answers". <BR/><BR/>We'll see more "Secrets" in the future, I predict.Ubersehenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17332607619856283785noreply@blogger.com