Human Design Criticism: 5 controversial perspectives highlighted

The fact is, Human Design is not a scientifically based system. It is an esoteric concept that combines elements of astrology, the I Ching, Kabbalah, the chakra model and quantum physics. Ra Uru Hu (Robert Allan Krakower) received it through a channeling process in Ibiza. Although there are an incredible number of proponents, it is understandable that Human Design is also criticized. In this article, I would like to address this criticism of Human Design and provide food for thought. So it’s worth reading on. 🙂

The interest in Human Design Criticism

A critical examination of human design is important. Everything that is given as a very clear answer to life should be scrutinized and not simply accepted. I am convinced that a lot of misinformation is being spread these days – sometimes even deliberately, in order to steer society in certain directions. That is why Human Design Criticism is a topic that I am happy to address.

You may have been introduced to the concept of Human Design to help you find answers and better understand your personality. This system promises to provide insights into the core of your being and help you better navigate your life and career path. But can you trust a tool based on mysticism and traditional teachings? To provide more clarity, I would like to highlight some selected criticisms of Human Design.

Human Design criticism: 5 selected points of criticism in focus

In the following lines, I will highlight 5 central points of criticism of the Human Design System. From the lack of scientific foundation to the possible dangers of typification – you can expect a comprehensive overview on the topic of human design criticism.

1. Human Design Criticism: Human Design has no scientific background

As with most esoteric or spiritual systems, there is little to no empirical evidence or scientific study to support the claims of Human Design (similar to the Law of Vibration).

Nevertheless, behavior-oriented studies on the effectiveness of human design have already been carried out, e.g. as part of team experiments (penta experiments) by the later founders of 64keys – the Ebhart couple in collaboration with the University of Vienna (Dr. Thomas Schneidhofer).

In penta experiments (team experiments), different teams were given tasks to solve a complex problem (crisis situation). The teams, which were deliberately put together according to certain activations, were observed. There were teams that were expected to work well together. And there were teams that were expected to work less well together. Overall, the tests confirmed the expected results.

Certain Human Design Charts of several participants could be actively used to put together successful teams or even less successful teams. Such great results on team behavior can be an incentive for individuals and companies to experiment with the Human Design Matrix. Rumor has it that even successful soccer clubs work with Human Design. I am very happy to accompany these analyses as part of Human Design Business Consulting.

2. Human Design Criticism: “Channeling” is esoteric nonsense

Ra Uru Hu, born Robert Allan Krakower, was the founder and ambassador of the Human Design System. Ra dedicated 25 years of his life to developing and teaching the system around the world until he died in 2011. Ra received the message through the process of channeling; specifically, he received the information about the Human Design System during a mystical experience in January 1987 on the island of Ibiza in Spain. During this experience, he was taught for eight days by a “voice” in a kind of trance, which conveyed the mechanisms of the Human Design System to him.

There is no scientifically recognized proof that channeling actually works. However, it is not uncommon for creative processes to take place in a state of unconsciousness. From time to time, book authors report such a phenomenon:

I had the feeling that I wasn’t writing this text myself, but that it was somehow flowing to me.

There are also musicians who claim to have received their creative ideas or pieces of music through a kind of “channeling”. They often describe moments when music or lyrics “flow to them” as if they came from an external or higher source. John Lennon described writing “Across the Universe” as receiving a “cosmic gift”. Paul McCartney said the melody of “Yesterday” appeared to him in a dream and described it as a “visit” from the melody.

Other artists also often feel that their work is inspired or even dictated by a higher or external source. The term “channeling” is rarely used in this context. Automatic writing, intuitive work or trance communication are other descriptions. In the end, channeling is probably not as uncanny and rare as we imagine it to be.

Sure – we prefer to understand logically how something works. But logic is not natural, it is an invention of the mind that is instilled in us from birth. Who knows, maybe we don’t even come up with our (best) ideas ourselves. Perhaps it is the ideas themselves that find us and “want” to come to fruition through our individual potential. But we have to perceive these ideas, e.g. by following our human design strategy.

3. Human Design Criticism: The complexity of Human Design can lead to misunderstandings

Human Design is definitely a complex system that you need a lot of time to get to grips with in depth. With all its components and aspects, Human Design requires a lot of learning time and familiarization.

Due to its complexity, it is not so easy to carry out a comprehensive analysis and give holistic advice. Especially if you take a close look at the matrix, you will notice that some statements contradict or cancel each other out. For example, a defined channel may say something that does not necessarily fit the Human Design Type. For example, a chart of a Generator (process-oriented doer type) may show various leadership aspects, although this type has little interest in leadership in general. With such characteristics, it makes sense for a coach to ask competent questions and for the client to feel inside themselves.

There is also a risk that you will rely too much on the Human Design system and disregard your own intuition and personal experience. As a coach, I never place myself above your own opinion with my Human Design Analysis or in a Human Design Career Reading. However, it is important to me to understand your opinion and put it to the test by asking clever questions. New perspectives lead to you approaching certain situations differently, which can turn out to be an opportunity.

My recommendation: Consider Human Design as a personal experiment or project. Human Design itself advises you, for example, to focus on your body feeling – especially when it comes to making decisions. Something that very few people do. It’s important to listen to your inner wisdom instead of blindly trusting a system, no matter how complex and fascinating it may be. Your body, for example, is such an inner wisdom, just like your mind and soul are.

4. Human Design Criticism: Human Design creates pigeonholing through typification

The fourth criticism of Human Design is the danger of pigeonholing that the Human Design system can entail. Human Design divides people into five different Human Design Types. This can lead to you dividing yourself or other people into prefabricated categories.

The Human Design Type is often analyzed at the beginning of the discovery of this matrix of each individual and bang… the drawers are open. I’m sure it was the same for you, wasn’t it? Please don’t get me wrong. I don’t want to demonize categorization. Our brain works in categories and so-called pigeonholes. That’s why types are just a natural result of our thinking apparatus.

However, focusing too much on human design typology can lead to a limited picture. It gives the impression that our personality, our behavior and our potential are fixed and unchangeable, which does not correspond to reality.

We experience it every day in our dealings with those around us. Because every person is unique. And they continue to develop independently. It is important to remember that no categorization or typification can fully capture the diversity of human life. Human Design should be seen as a tool that can help people to understand themselves better, and not as another pigeonhole that makes it easier to categorize themselves and others.

5. Human Design Criticism: A potential analysis using birth data is not a valid personality test

Let’s move on to the fifth and final human design criticism in this article. Personality tests based on the Myers-Briggs type indicator, the Big Five model or the DNLA potential analysis, for example, are generally based on answers to specific questionnaires. The individual results are often compared with statistical averages for the population. Statements are then made on the basis of these deviations. The significance of the results depends heavily on the quality of the methodology used and the type of questions.

A person’s answers to questions always reflect cultural imprints, past experiences stored in our brain and the current state of mind. In contrast, analysing birth data is not a scientifically recognised method for making valid statements about a person’s personality traits.

Human Design assumes that every person is born with certain personality traits, talents and potential that are inherent in them, so to speak. This is a different approach to questionnaire tests, which is also very beneficial for children and their parents. Even if this approach does not conform to scientific standards, we should ask ourselves the following questions:

• Is science perhaps not yet in a position to describe why the results of a potential analysis are so often accurate and therefore so popular?
• Are the positive findings from practice not proof enough to characterise a system as helpful?
• Do millennia-old philosophies that have proven themselves in practice over a long period of time have to stand up to scientific scrutiny when science is still in its infancy by comparison?

FAQ: Questions about Human Design Criticism