Philosophically, one may fight that ACIM's primary tenets are fundamentally flawed for their reliance on metaphysical assertions that cannot be substantiated through reason or empirical evidence. ACIM posits that the entire world we see with our feelings can be an dream, a projection of our collective egos, and that true the reality is a non-dualistic state of ideal enjoy and unity with God. That worldview echoes facets of Gnosticism and Eastern spiritual traditions like Advaita Vedanta, but it stands in stark contrast to materialist or empiricist perspectives that master much of contemporary viewpoint and science. From a materialist point of view, the bodily world is not an dream but the only real truth we are able to fairly examine and understand. Any assertion that dismisses the tangible world as mere impression without empirical support comes to the world of speculation rather than fact.

Theologically, ACIM deviates considerably from conventional Christian doctrines, which casts uncertainty on their legitimacy as a religious text declaring to be authored by Jesus Christ. Popular Christianity is made on the teachings of the Bible, which assert the reality of crime, the necessity of Christ's atoning a course in miracles sacrifice, and the importance of religion in Jesus for salvation. ACIM, however, denies the fact of sin, seeing it instead as a misperception, and dismisses the necessity for atonement through Christ's compromise, advocating alternatively for a personal awakening to the inherent heavenly nature within each individual. This radical departure from orthodox Religious values increases questions about the authenticity of ACIM's proposed divine source. If the teachings of ACIM contradict the primary tenets of Christianity, it becomes difficult to reconcile their states with the recognized religious custom it purports to arrange with.

Psychologically, the course's increased exposure of the illusory character of putting up with and the energy of your head to generate truth could be both liberating and perhaps dangerous. On one give, the idea that we are able to surpass suffering via a change in belief may empower persons to assume control of these psychological and psychological claims, fostering a feeling of firm and internal peace. On another give, this perception can lead to an application of spiritual bypassing, wherever individuals ignore or ignore real-life issues and psychological suffering underneath the guise of religious insight. By training that all negative activities are pure forecasts of the confidence, ACIM might inadvertently inspire persons in order to avoid addressing underlying psychological issues or interesting with the real-world causes of their distress. This process could be specially harmful for individuals working with significant intellectual health situations, as it may reduce them from seeking essential medical or healing interventions.

Empirically, there's little to no clinical evidence encouraging the metaphysical statements created by ACIM. The proven fact that the bodily world can be an dream produced by our combined vanity lacks scientific help and operates counter to the huge human body of medical knowledge gathered through ages of observation and experimentation. While subjective experiences of transcendence and spiritual awakening are well-documented, they cannot offer goal proof the non-dualistic truth that ACIM describes. More over, the course's assertion that adjusting one's ideas can transform fact in a literal feeling is similar to the New Thought motion and the more recent law of attraction, equally of which have been criticized for missing scientific validity. The placebo impact and the energy of positive considering are well-documented phenomena, but they do not support the grand metaphysical states produced by ACIM.