Accentuate the Rational, Eliminate the Woo-woo Redux

Posted by Rex Alexander on Wed 2 Jul 25 in Uncategorized | ∞
4.5
(6)

The Shocking Truth About “Positive Thinking”

by Rex Alexander (with some help from Perplexity)
Wed 2 Jul 2025

Dear readers, thank you for joining me on this journey. This article still needs some work, but it is an important and timely update to and expansion of my original article from many years ago, Accentuate the Rational, Eliminate the Woo-woo. 

But here’s what might shock you a bit: I’m going to systematically challenge one of the most widely accepted truisms of our time—that “positive thinking” (by any of its various names) is invariably a good and useful thing. This should be a little jarring to readers who have simply assumed all their lives that “positivity” is always beneficial.

I often write to give so-called “positive thinking” a deservedly hard time, not just because it deserves criticism, but because the issue is genuinely important. Perhaps a small dose of positive thinking can be somewhat helpful for a brief period, but in its most absurd form, positive thinking attempts to make things happen by thinking about them, by willing them to happen. As Robert T. Carroll of the invaluable Skeptic’s Dictionary (skepdic.com) astutely points out, this represents a fundamental misunderstanding of how reality operates23.
 
I wholeheartedly agree with Carroll’s words and his skeptical sentiments. While many vehemently disagree—insisting that positive thinking can indeed cure cancer—there simply is no persuasive evidence that “thinking makes it so.” Sorry to be the bearer of this uncomfortable truth. This is an issue of paramount importance to REBT because REBT, after all, supports rational thinking, rational emoting, and rational behaving, making it inherently antagonistic toward wishful thinking and superstition.
This is far more than an academic issue because what I call the “woo-woo” version of positive thinking can be more than just silly and insipid—it can be cruel, toxic, and self-defeating. It proves especially cruel when victims are encouraged to feel guilty and inadequate when the magical thinking fails to cure their cancer or solve their problems.
 
Moreover, it seems likely that human beings possess an inbred tendency toward credulity, gullibility, and superstition. While these qualities—along with our myriad cognitive biases—may have conferred evolutionary advantages in prehistoric environments, they are certainly no longer useful in modern societies where critical thinking and evidence-based decision-making are essential for navigating complex challenges.

The Great Detective Story: Tracing the Roots of Magical Thinking

Here’s where our story becomes a fascinating detective tale that reveals how many ideas we associate with the “New Age” movement didn’t simply “grow on trees” or emerge from a vacuum. They have clear, specific roots that can be traced like a genealogy of delusion.

The Father of It All: Phineas Parkhurst Quimby (1802-1866)

Our story begins with Phineas Parkhurst Quimby, a watchmaker from Maine with little formal education who is widely recognized as the “Father of New Thought”45. Born in Lebanon, New Hampshire, Quimby developed tuberculosis but found no relief from the medical treatments of his era. This led him to explore alternative approaches to healing and to develop what he called “mind healing”4.
Through careful observation and experimentation, Quimby came to believe that “mind is matter in solution and matter is mind in form”—a metaphysical concept that would become foundational to everything that followed6. He employed hypnosis initially but discovered he could heal through suggestion alone, holding that all illness was fundamentally a matter of the mind resulting from patients’ mistaken beliefs4. Although not religious in the orthodox sense, he believed he had rediscovered the healing methods of Jesus.
 
Remarkably, Quimby even coined the term “Christian Science,” which would later be adopted and popularized by one of his most famous patients4.

Mary Baker Eddy: The Systematizer (1821-1910)

Mary Baker Eddy, who founded the Christian Science Church, was initially a fragile, sensitive woman who suffered from unstable health throughout most of her life7. Due to her poor health, she had virtually no formal education and struggled financially well into her fifties7. In 1862, she sought treatment from Quimby and experienced what she considered a profound healing8.
 
After studying with Quimby, Eddy went on to systematize and organize his ideas, eventually founding the Church of Christ, Scientist, in 18798. She published multiple editions of “Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures,” which became the foundational text of Christian Science8. However, controversy surrounded her relationship with Quimby—she later denied that her “discovery” of Christian Science was influenced by him, despite extensive documentation of their connection4.
What made Christian Science particularly bizarre was its core belief that sickness is literally an illusion or “error,” meaning there is nothing to heal—the practitioner’s job is simply to correct the mental mistake that creates the appearance of illness1. As I noted in my original article, such ideas seem “very nearly psychotic in hindsight.”

Emma Curtis Hopkins: The Mother of New Thought (1849-1925)

Perhaps the most influential figure you’ve never heard of is Emma Curtis Hopkins, often called the “Mother of New Thought” and the “teacher of teachers”910. Hopkins initially served as editor of Eddy’s Christian Science Journal but was dismissed in 1885, reportedly for reading metaphysical books other than Eddy’s writings910.
After breaking with Eddy, Hopkins moved to Chicago in 1887 and opened what would later be called the Emma Hopkins College of Metaphysical Science10. Her influence was enormous—among her students were Charles and Myrtle Fillmore (founders of Unity School of Christianity), Malinda E. Cramer (co-founder of Divine Science), and later Ernest Holmes (founder of the Church of Religious Science)1110.

The Remarkable Role of Women

Here’s a fascinating aspect of this story that reveals the political realities of the times: many of the luminaries in this field were women1213. This reflects the historical reality that “metaphysics” and “magic” were seen as some of the few ways women could excel outside the home and take control of their destiny during an era when most professional opportunities were closed to them12.
 
Hopkins was particularly progressive in this regard—she was apparently the first woman in modern times to ordain women as Christian ministers1310. In her first graduation ceremony in 1889, she graduated twenty-two individuals, twenty of whom were women10. She taught that the third person of the Trinity was the Holy Mother or Comforter, developing what scholars recognize as the first alternative feminist theology to attract a sizable following10.
 
This feminist aspect of New Thought gave it particular appeal to women with professional aspirations who were otherwise excluded from public life13. The professional empowerment of women contributed significantly to the early success of New Thought by attracting talented women to the movement and reform-minded men with progressive social visions.

The 20th Century Confluence: How Disparate Streams Became a Torrent

As we moved into the 20th century, several distinct streams began to converge, creating the loose amalgam of “woo-woo” ideas we now associate with the New Age Movement14.

The Secular Positive Thinkers

Émile Coué introduced autosuggestion through his 1922 book Self-Mastery Through Conscious Autosuggestion1516. His famous mantra—”Every day, in every way, I’m getting better and better”—became the prototype for countless affirmations that followed1516. Coué, a French pharmacist, had observed the placebo effect and developed what he called “conscious autosuggestion,” believing that any idea exclusively occupying the mind turns into reality, at least within the realm of possibility16.
 
Napoleon Hill built on these ideas with his 1937 bestseller Think and Grow Rich, which has reportedly sold over 15 million copies1718. Hill claimed to have studied successful individuals for over twenty years, distilling their secrets into principles of achievement17. However, recent scholarship reveals Hill as something of a charlatan whose life was marked by fraudulent business practices and questionable claims18.
 
Norman Vincent Peale popularized these concepts further with The Power of Positive Thinking (1952), which spent 186 weeks on the New York Times bestseller list19. Peale’s approach combined biblical references with practical techniques involving affirmations and visualizations19.
 
Dale Carnegie, while focused primarily on interpersonal relationships and public speaking, contributed to the cultural shift toward optimistic thinking with works like How to Stop Worrying and Start Living20.

Eastern Influences

The mid-20th century saw an influx of Eastern spiritual teachers and concepts into American culture. Figures like Paramahansa Yogananda brought Hindu and Buddhist concepts of mind-over-matter to Western audiences, providing an exotic veneer to ideas that were remarkably similar to those already present in New Thought circles.

The Human Potential Movement

The 1960s and 1970s witnessed the emergence of the Human Potential Movement, which arose from the counterculture and formed around the belief that extraordinary potential lay largely untapped in all people2122. This movement spawned numerous approaches including est, Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP), primal scream therapy, encounter groups, and Silva Mind Control2122.
 
Interestingly, NLP—which many consider a legitimate psychological technique—was actually one of hundreds of offshoots of the Human Potential Movement, though this connection is rarely acknowledged in NLP literature22. The “NLP Presuppositions” are essentially repackaged assumptions from the Human Potential Movement22.

The New Age Synthesis

By the 1970s, these various streams had converged into what we now call the New Age Movement1423. The term “New Age” became a banner under which to bring together the wider “cultic milieu” of American society14. As scholar Olav Hammer noted, it became “perfectly feasible for the same individuals to consult the I Ching, practice Jungian astrology, read Abraham Maslow’s writings on peak experiences,” and engage with various other practices unified by the goal of “exploring an individualized and largely non-Christian religiosity”14.
 
This industry now generates nearly $10 billion annually, projected to increase to over $13 billion by 20221. The remarkable thing is that very few participants understand that these supposedly “new” ideas come directly from 19th-century New Thought, unified by the premise that you can control people, places, things, and the course of events by how you think about them1.

The Uniquely American Phenomenon

What makes this story particularly fascinating is how uniquely American all of this is1. New Thought and its subsequent manifestations are American cultural phenomena in the same way that jazz music and baseball are uniquely American. European and other cultures are simply not as attracted to or “oriented” toward this tree of New Thought and its subsequent tainted fruit.
 
This American exceptionalism in embracing magical thinking reflects deeper cultural values. As L. Robert Kohls noted in his analysis of American values, individualism has taken “its most exaggerated form in 20th century United States”24. The American belief that individuals can control their destiny through willpower and positive thinking aligns perfectly with cultural values emphasizing personal responsibility and the pursuit of success24.
 
Cross-cultural research supports this observation. Studies comparing American and East Asian approaches to positive thinking reveal significant cultural differences25. While Americans tend to embrace positive thinking regardless of context, East Asian cultures show more nuanced, contextual approaches—being less optimistic about positive events but more optimistic about negative ones, reflecting beliefs in dialectical change rather than linear progress25.

The Academic Hoax: “Positive Psychology”

One of the most shameless developments in recent decades has been the emergence of “Positive Psychology” as an academic discipline—a transparent attempt to give an academic veneer and credibility to what is essentially a spiritual subject involving considerable faith and minimal science.
 
Since its formal introduction in 1998, Positive Psychology has positioned itself as a scientific counterbalance to traditional psychology’s focus on pathology26. However, critics have identified numerous fundamental problems with this field2728:
 
Lack of Scientific Rigor: Critics argue that positive psychology lacks proper theorizing, employs poor methodologies, and presents claims unsupported by empirical evidence2728. The field has been criticized for exaggerating the benefits of its interventions and showing poor replicability27.
 
Pseudoscientific Elements: The field has been characterized as pseudoscience that relies heavily on confirmation bias and fails to meet basic scientific standards27. Many studies use poor measurement tools and cross-sectional designs while neglecting more robust experimental approaches27.
 
Lack of Novelty: Critics contend that positive psychology merely repackages existing concepts from other psychological domains without contributing genuine innovations2728. The field has been accused of creating an artificial divide between “negative” psychology and “optimal human functioning” to justify its existence28.
 
Ideological Problems: Perhaps most damaging, positive psychology has been criticized as a neoliberal ideology that positions Western values as universal while neglecting cultural context2728. This approach can marginalize vulnerable groups and lead to victim-blaming by placing excessive responsibility for happiness on individuals while ignoring systemic issues27.
 
Commercial Motivation: Critics perceive the field as driven by commercial interests rather than scientific rigor, suggesting it has become a “capitalistic venture” that commodifies happiness and wellbeing2728.

Barbara Ehrenreich: A Kindred Spirit in the Fight Against Delusion

It wasn’t until after I wrote my original article that I discovered the brilliant and heartbreaking book by Barbara Ehrenreich: Bright-sided: How Positive Thinking Is Undermining America293031. This New York Times bestseller represents one of the most incisive critiques of positive thinking ever written, and Ehrenreich and I share remarkably similar concerns about the successful “brainwashing” the American public has undergone regarding positive thinking.
 
 Suffering from breast cancer, her narrative is especially poignant in its depiction of the well-meaning yet “crazy making” help she received from medical and support professionals, who relentlessly insisted that she put a positive spin on her life-threatening illness. Ehrenreich’s work is particularly powerful because she approaches the subject as a sharp-witted social critic who exposes how positive thinking has infiltrated every corner of American life2930. She demonstrates how this ideology has infected evangelical megachurches, the medical establishment, and most dangerously, the business community, where the refusal to consider negative outcomes—like mortgage defaults—contributed directly to the 2008 economic disaster2930.
 
What makes Ehrenreich’s critique especially compelling is her exposure of the dark underbelly of positive thinking: personal self-blame and national denial2930. She reveals how this seemingly benign philosophy creates a culture where individuals blame themselves for failures that may be largely beyond their control, while society refuses to acknowledge systemic problems that require collective solutions.
Her work validates many of the concerns I’ve raised about the cruel and toxic aspects of woo-woo positive thinking, particularly its tendency to blame victims when magical thinking fails to solve their problems2930.

Robert T. Carroll: A Champion of Rational Thinking

Another invaluable resource in promoting rational thinking, skepticism, and reality-driven living is Robert T. Carroll’s Skeptic’s Dictionary23. Carroll’s comprehensive work, launched online in 1994 and published as a book in 2003, serves as a crucial counterbalance to the voluminous occult and paranormal literature flooding our culture2.
 
The Skeptic’s Dictionary, which receives approximately 500,000 visits per month, provides definitions, arguments, and essays on supernatural, occult, paranormal, and pseudoscientific subjects232. As Carroll himself states, the dictionary doesn’t try to present a “balanced” account of occult subjects—it serves as a “Davidian counter-balance to the Goliath of occult literature”32.
 
Carroll’s approach is particularly valuable because it provides specific, evidence-based refutations of common magical thinking claims3. His work exemplifies the kind of rigorous, scientific thinking we need more of in a world increasingly dominated by wishful thinking and superstition.

The Rational Alternative: Distinguishing Science from Superstition

The ultimate goal of this exercise is to encourage rational thinking, critical thinking, and healthy skepticism. This doesn’t mean embracing cynicism or negativity—quite the opposite. It means learning to distinguish where the rational ends and the woo-woo begins, remaining mindful that we don’t slip into magical thinking territory while also avoiding the trap of chronic pessimism.

The REBT-CBT Distinction

This is why it’s crucial to distinguish between REBT-CBT and positive thinking. People with casual understanding often dismiss REBT-CBT as “just another form of positive thinking,” but nothing could be further from the truth1. REBT-CBT is based on:
  • Rational analysis of situations rather than wishful thinking
  • Evidence-based techniques rather than faith-based affirmations
  • Acceptance of reality rather than attempts to manipulate it through              thought
  • Personal responsibility within realistic limitations rather than magical            control

Rational Optimism vs. Magical Thinking

While positive thinking may occasionally reduce stress (which can benefit immune function), it cannot and does not guarantee outcomes1. Rational optimism employs affirmations and coping statements that:
  • Are rational, reasonable, and conform to reality
  • Are free of woo-woo, superstition, and overreaching
  • Augment and enhance traditional therapeutic work rather than replacing it
  • Accept the role of chance, circumstance, and systemic factors
The key difference is that rational optimism helps us manage the process better regardless of outcome, while magical positive thinking promises to control the outcome through mental manipulation.

Conclusion: The Courage to Face Reality

As we’ve seen through this detective story, the ideas underlying modern positive thinking and New Age beliefs have deep, traceable roots going back to 19th-century New Thought pioneers. What began with Phineas Quimby’s well-intentioned but misguided theories about mind over matter evolved through Mary Baker Eddy’s Christian Science, was systematized by Emma Curtis Hopkins, secularized by figures like Norman Vincent Peale, and eventually merged with Eastern philosophy and the Human Potential Movement to create the current New Age marketplace.
The tragedy is that what started as an attempt to empower people—particularly women seeking agency in restrictive times—has devolved into a cruel system that often blames victims for their suffering while promising impossible solutions. The academic legitimization through “Positive Psychology” only adds insult to injury by dressing up wishful thinking in scientific language.
 
Barbara Ehrenreich’s brilliant critique and Robert T. Carroll’s tireless skeptical work provide essential antidotes to this cultural delusion. They remind us that while life often presents genuine challenges requiring collective action and systemic solutions, magical thinking only distracts us from the hard work of rational problem-solving.
The courage to face reality—even when it’s uncomfortable—remains superior to the false comfort of fantasy. Rational optimism, grounded in evidence and acceptance of life’s genuine uncertainties, offers a far more robust foundation for human flourishing than the glittering promises of positive thinking’s woo-woo alternatives.
As I ask those still deeply committed to magical thinking: “How is that going for you?” Perhaps it’s time to accentuate the rational and eliminate the woo-woo.

Loading

How useful was this post?

Click on a star to rate it!

Average rating 4.5 / 5. Vote count: 6

No votes so far! Be the first to rate this post.

Follow me
Latest posts by Rex Alexander (see all)

    Copyright © 2018-2025 All rights reserved.
    This site is using the Desk Mess Mirrored Child Child-Theme, v2.2.4.1.1500210207, on top of
    the Parent-Theme Desk Mess Mirrored, v2.5, from BuyNowShop.com