all the "scientists" on what the bleep do we know were discredited or misquoted.

to quote:

The premise of the film is that quantum mechanics proves a conscious observer is necessary to create reality. The conclusion is we literally create reality with our thoughts.

Unfortunately the theory of quantum mechanics does not say this. The film makers are confusing the theory of quantum mechanics with an interpretation of quantum mechanics. This is an explanation to help understand what might be going on, but it is not part of the theory because it is not falsifiable: it cannot be tested in such a way that, if it were false, it would fail the test (without falsifying the whole of quantum mechanics, and therefore all the other interpretations too).

To falsify this interpretation you would have to see what would happen without a conscious observer monitoring the experiment. But that s Catch-22: you need a conscious observer monitoring the experiment to see what happens. You can t look at the experiment without looking at it so no one can ever know if this interpretation is true. Even if it were true, extrapolating to we literally create reality by out thoughts is applying reductionism to an absurd level.

Don t believe me? You don t have to because David Albert, the professor from the Columbia University physics department who was featured in the film, is quoted in Salon.com saying:


I was edited in such a way as to completely suppress my actual views about the matters the movie discusses. I am, indeed, profoundly unsympathetic to attempts at linking quantum mechanics with consciousness. Moreover, I explained all that, at great length, on camera, to the producers of the film ... Had I known that I would have been so radically misrepresented in the movie, I would certainly not have agreed to be filmed.

The principles underlying "The Secret" do actually work. For me at least... they work *to a point.* But....

There are real dangers with this kind of "theology" (if you want to call it that.) For one, it's quite easy to make a somewhat logical jump to "blaming the victim." In other words... if things are not going well for you, it is because you are not "thinking right." You are attracting negativity into your life and it's your own fault. Such thinking would fly in the face of three of our principles:

*The inherent worth and dignity of every person;

*Justice, equity and compassion in human relations;

*Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations;


The second weakness in "The Secret" paradigm is that it can discourage positive action in some ways. For instance... I know folks who live by the doctrine of "The Secret" who will not follow the current political race. "It's too negative" they complain. "I don't want to surround myself with that."

This kind of avoidance is, it seems to me, decidedly antithetical to a few more of our UU principles:

*A free and responsible search for truth and meaning;

*The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and in society at large;

*The goal of world community with peace, liberty, and justice for all;

Unitarian Universalism does not offer us doctrines.... we are each free to search for our own. But.... the seven principles *do* offer us some guidelines as to the pitfalls we may encounter. With a doctrine like "The Secret" where you have six of seven principles waving the red flag..... it really is incumbant upon the "upstanding" or "back-laying" UU to proceed with skepticism.

Just my .02

Amma