Psychologically, the course's increased exposure of the illusory character of putting up with and the power of the mind to produce truth may be equally issuing and perhaps dangerous. On one hand, the idea that we can surpass putting up with by way of a change in understanding may encourage people to assume control of the psychological and psychological claims, fostering an expression of organization and inner peace. On another hand, this perception may cause a questionnaire of religious skipping, where persons dismiss or ignore real-life problems and mental pain beneath the guise of spiritual insight. By training that all negative experiences are simple forecasts of the vanity, ACIM may accidentally encourage persons to avoid handling main emotional dilemmas or participating with the real-world factors behind their distress. This process may be particularly dangerous for individuals coping with significant mental wellness conditions, as it can reduce them from seeking essential medical or beneficial interventions.

Empirically, there's little to number medical evidence encouraging the metaphysical statements made by ACIM. The indisputable fact that the bodily world is an illusion developed by our combined confidence lacks empirical support and runs table to the substantial human body of scientific information accumulated a course in miracles through ages of statement and experimentation. While subjective experiences of transcendence and religious awareness are well-documented, they do not offer aim evidence of the non-dualistic fact that ACIM describes. Moreover, the course's assertion that changing one's ideas can transform fact in a literal feeling is similar to the New Believed motion and the more new law of attraction, equally of which have been criticized for lacking scientific validity. The placebo impact and the energy of good thinking are well-documented phenomena, but they don't help the grand metaphysical statements made by ACIM.

More over, the roots of ACIM raise extra issues about their credibility. Helen Schucman, the psychiatrist who transcribed the program, identified her knowledge as obtaining dictation from an internal style she recognized as Jesus. This technique of channeled publishing is not distinctive to ACIM and can be found in various other spiritual and spiritual texts throughout history. The subjective nature of those experiences causes it to be difficult to examine their authenticity. Experts fight that such texts are much more likely items of the unconscious brain as opposed to communications from the heavenly source. Schucman himself had a complex relationship with the product, allegedly experiencing significant inner struggle about its material and their beginnings, which gives another coating of ambiguity to the course's states of heavenly authorship.

Additionally, the language and style of ACIM in many cases are esoteric and abstract, making it burdensome for many visitors to comprehend and apply its teachings. The program is written in a highly stylized kind of British, with dense, poetic prose that may be difficult to interpret. That difficulty may cause a wide variety of understandings, some of which can diverge somewhat from the intended message. The ambiguity of the writing allows for subjective readings, which may result in misconceptions and misapplications of its principles. That insufficient quality can undermine the course's efficiency as a functional information for religious development and self-improvement.