3 ms·

Energy is well defined. There is no known form of energy that can do what the commenter is claiming it can. So someone making a claim about the realness of re

Energy is well defined. There is no known form of energy that can do what the commenter is claiming it can. So someone making a claim about the realness of reiki energy needs to either prove it and explain its properties in ways that are true of other forms of energy, or possibly more easily, they need to change their terminology. The problem is that the reiki and homeopathy, etc practitioners deliberately abuse scientific terminology because it adds a veneer of believability to their otherwise outlandish claims. And it fools the layman into believing there is actually some science behind their claims. If they did choose to use appropriate terminology based on the actual properties, they will find that terminology will converge to words and phrases like “placebo effect” and “emotional support” rather quickly, which cannot earn them hundreds of dollars an hour.

jlokier 7y ago
The word "energy" in this domain is not being used to refer to the same thing as "energy" in science and engineering. And by the way, the word "energy" did not originate in science and engineering. So statements like "there is no known form of energy that can do what the commenter is claiming it can" are incorrect, because they are meaningless when applied to homonyms. They are just artefacts of people talking past one another. I think the commenter who explained that "subtle energy" is best understood as an atomic language term that means something different from "energy" has it about right. It would be helpful if people would stop trying to be "scientific" while actually ignoring the meanings of things being talked about by each other. That goes for the practitioners applying an unsupported veneer of scientific credibility to claims, but it also goes for armchair scientist types applying an unsupported veneer of knowledge about a subject they have chosen to not really study.
hosh 7y ago
I never claimed that "subtle energy" is the same kind of energy that is well-defined by the science of physics. I use that term because it behaves a lot like physical energy. It has intensity. The more of it there is, the more things become active. It keeps being used as a term because for those who experience it, the concept of energy describes it very well. But one of the characteristic it has that is not described by physics is that it carries information: emotions, concepts, awareness, sentience. For example, there are two forms of subtle energy that can be described as "electric" and "magnetic". It is similar enough that people use those terms for it. The Theosophists of the early 20th century popularized that notion ... but the actual experience of the "electric" energy is more like living, liquid, luminous lightning (electric). It is not electricity.

jlokier 7y ago

The word "energy" in this domain is not being used to refer to the same thing as "energy" in science and engineering. And by the way, the word "energy" did not originate in science and engineering. So statements like "there is no known form of energy that can do what the commenter is claiming it can" are incorrect, because they are meaningless when applied to homonyms. They are just artefacts of people talking past one another. I think the commenter who explained that "subtle energy" is best understood as an atomic language term that means something different from "energy" has it about right. It would be helpful if people would stop trying to be "scientific" while actually ignoring the meanings of things being talked about by each other. That goes for the practitioners applying an unsupported veneer of scientific credibility to claims, but it also goes for armchair scientist types applying an unsupported veneer of knowledge about a subject they have chosen to not really study.

hosh 7y ago

I never claimed that "subtle energy" is the same kind of energy that is well-defined by the science of physics. I use that term because it behaves a lot like physical energy. It has intensity. The more of it there is, the more things become active. It keeps being used as a term because for those who experience it, the concept of energy describes it very well. But one of the characteristic it has that is not described by physics is that it carries information: emotions, concepts, awareness, sentience. For example, there are two forms of subtle energy that can be described as "electric" and "magnetic". It is similar enough that people use those terms for it. The Theosophists of the early 20th century popularized that notion ... but the actual experience of the "electric" energy is more like living, liquid, luminous lightning (electric). It is not electricity.