massage and bodywork professionals
a community of practitioners
Skeptical about Energy Work
Folks -
There previously was a discussion on this site in which a skeptical attitude toward energy work was being discussed, but that discussion eventually got deleted. The reason seems to be that it was judged not to belong in the location where it was taking place, which was inside one of the energy work groups.
I was the person who introduced the skepticism to the discussion. Some people did not appreciate that, but others did. Given how many participants there are on this site, and how many threads and groups are dedicated to discussing energy work with no skepticism, I thought maybe it was time to open a discussion where such skepticism is invited and welcomed.
I look forward to seeing how this discussion might develop. Is there interest?
-CM
There previously was a discussion on this site in which a skeptical attitude toward energy work was being discussed, but that discussion eventually got deleted. The reason seems to be that it was judged not to belong in the location where it was taking place, which was inside one of the energy work groups.
I was the person who introduced the skepticism to the discussion. Some people did not appreciate that, but others did. Given how many participants there are on this site, and how many threads and groups are dedicated to discussing energy work with no skepticism, I thought maybe it was time to open a discussion where such skepticism is invited and welcomed.
I look forward to seeing how this discussion might develop. Is there interest?
-CM
Views: 3110
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Christopher A. Moyer on
-
I don’t use the term “energy beings” but I kind of like it.
I think a lot of people like it - it sounds kind of warm and positive. But the problem is that it doesn't really mean anything; it's much too vague to be useful (beyond sounding nice).
Chris, you said “humans, like all living things, are metabolic systems.” What is your definition of a living thing?
Oh man, there is a huge question. :) It's a question I like, on a topic I like, but I think it's much too big for me to get into here, now. I think for the present topic we should be able to limit ourselves to things we will all agree are living animials - humans. These are what we're talking about when we're talking about energy work, right? (Yes, I realize some probably perform it on animals such as pets, too.)
-
-
Hi Deborah. Welcome.
I don't know what your skepticism is based on or the history of the previous thread that was diverted. I'm assuming that you are skeptical because energy cannot be seen and its effects are not prominently displayed.
It's not essential that it be able to be seen. Magnetic fields cannot be seen by themselves, but we can still verify their existence. The forms of energy alleged to exist by proponents of energy work have not been verified. If these forms of energy did exist, verifying them would actually be a fairly trivial demonstration. It wouldn't require special technology - all we would need to do is to get energy work practitioners to give consistent reports of what they claim to detect under controlled conditions.
As an aside, I will also add that Thomas Edison was ridiculed and laughed at in his day before the world lit up. Check him out. (Also Nikola Tesla).
I'm familiar with both. It's also true that for every Edison or Tesla, whom some may have ridiculed, there are several dozen or hundreds of folks such as Gene Ray, who aren't onto something (but maybe on something). In other words, it's a logical fallacy to go from "Edison was ridiculed, but turned out to be right, ergo energy workers who are ridiculed will also turn out to be right."
Ahem, Ok, here I go: Energy work can NOT be discounted. Whether you are performing any massage, which is what I commonly refer to as "the laying on of hands" you are transferring some energy to the person you are touching, as they are to you. Energy moves in, out, around, over, under, and through us because we are also energetic fields, however dense, with more or less activity.
"We are energetic fields" is a very imprecise thing to say. I could agree that the human body stores, uses, and releases energy in various forms. I can't agree that we are energetic fields.
In yoga, the breath creates the cardiovascular response that is required to name "yoga" as an "exercise". It may seem trite, or even outrageous to make this claim, but breathing in and out is transferring energy. A metabolic process then moves energy around in the body, and releases toxins (also energy) and stimulates an energetic renewal to the brain (the brain becomes more active).
Breathing is important, and we can change the way we feel by changing the way we are breathing. But just because this process, or any other bodily process, involves metabolic systems, it does not follow that altering them is "energy work." If that were the case, everything would be energy work, and the term would be meaningless.
In our western culture, we have migrated away from ancient practices and beliefs about energy and whether it is real or where its presence is. Religious culture has tainted these beliefs as counter to "the miracle" of Christ, even though, Jesus himself practiced meditation, breath exercises, laying on of hands (reiki) and other of the lost arts.
Yes, laying on of hands has a long, long history, no doubt. And it can even have an effect - to have someone touch or hold you in a way that is meaningful can be profound, and will change the way that you feel, which can even subtly change what is happening in one's body. But this does not happen by means of biofields; this happens because the people involved experience tactile sensations, and attach meaning to those sensations. This is amazing, actually, but it's not energy work. It is a combination of physical and psychological processes that can be understood without positing a manipulation of vital force.
Do this little exercise. Close your eyes and rub your hands together until they are very warm. Then, move them toward each other, palms facing one another, as though you are forming a ball. Do this slowly and notice the results.
Do I separate them after rubbing them? And then, you want me to move them together, without quite touching?
Suppose I understand your instructions, and I follow them, and I DO sense something in my hands even though they are not quite touching. What would that indicate?
-
Permalink Reply by Kim Goral on
-
Julianna Holden Mohler said:"He, himself, is not a scientist but is posing as one. It's not his profession."
Wow, really? Then what do you call a 1) Psychologist and 2) someone who conducts research in a laboratory? Last I checked, that would be a scientist.
J- "Hippocrates believed in the power of positive thinking. "Some patients, though conscious that their condition is perilous, recover their health simply through their contentment with the goodness of the physician," he wrote. He found that when patients trust you, they seem to get well more consistently. He also said that the genuine good intentions of the physician were vital."
This is a good thing to bring up- The power of positive thinking is actually a well documented effect. It's a big component (sometimes with a different name) in many health behavior models, including the Health Belief Model and the Transactional Model of Stress and Coping.
J-"The placebo affect has every bit of relevance to healing, in other words. If the power of belief (in wellness for oneself) induces healing, then there is a factor no one can measure in how the positive thought produced the healing. If the intention of my work is to bring about wellness to the degree the person desires it, if I treat that person ethically and with integrity, it can and does affect their well-being, and that can be measured"
Again- the placebo effect can be quite powerful, as is just power of thought overall. It can play off of conditioning (Pavlov and his dogs, etc)- take for instance a child who falls and bumps their knee. You can put a band-aid on the bump and the child will feel better- not because the band-aid is actually doing anything (let's assume no skin was broken), but because the child knows in the past you put a band-aid on a cut and it gets better, so the child immediately feels better.
I'm glad you brought up both positive thinking and the placebo effect (though I think both have been mentioned before). Now knowing the powerful effects of both of these, isn't is possible that when someone receives "energy work" and feels better after, that their better feeling is a result of both positive thinking and the placebo effect and there was no "change of energy" at all? No one is denying the changes people experience or witness- some of us just question or doubt the explanations given by some people (energy workers) as to WHY those changes occurred.
PS- Julianna would it kill you to refrain from personal attacks? It sort of takes away from anything of value that you say.
-
Permalink Reply by Deborah Herriage on
-
Christopher A. Moyer said:Hi Deborah. Welcome.
I don't know what your skepticism is based on or the history of the previous thread that was diverted. I'm assuming that you are skeptical because energy cannot be seen and its effects are not prominently displayed.
It's not essential that it be able to be seen. Magnetic fields cannot be seen by themselves, but we can still verify their existence. The forms of energy alleged to exist by proponents of energy work have not been verified. If these forms of energy did exist, verifying them would actually be a fairly trivial demonstration. It wouldn't require special technology - all we would need to do is to get energy work practitioners to give consistent reports of what they claim to detect under controlled conditions.
As an aside, I will also add that Thomas Edison was ridiculed and laughed at in his day before the world lit up. Check him out. (Also Nikola Tesla).
I'm familiar with both. It's also true that for every Edison or Tesla, whom some may have ridiculed, there are several dozen or hundreds of folks such as Gene Ray, who aren't onto something (but maybe on something). In other words, it's a logical fallacy to go from "Edison was ridiculed, but turned out to be right, ergo energy workers who are ridiculed will also turn out to be right."
Ahem, Ok, here I go: Energy work can NOT be discounted. Whether you are performing any massage, which is what I commonly refer to as "the laying on of hands" you are transferring some energy to the person you are touching, as they are to you. Energy moves in, out, around, over, under, and through us because we are also energetic fields, however dense, with more or less activity.
"We are energetic fields" is a very imprecise thing to say. I could agree that the human body stores, uses, and releases energy in various forms. I can't agree that we are energetic fields.
In yoga, the breath creates the cardiovascular response that is required to name "yoga" as an "exercise". It may seem trite, or even outrageous to make this claim, but breathing in and out is transferring energy. A metabolic process then moves energy around in the body, and releases toxins (also energy) and stimulates an energetic renewal to the brain (the brain becomes more active).
Breathing is important, and we can change the way we feel by changing the way we are breathing. But just because this process, or any other bodily process, involves metabolic systems, it does not follow that altering them is "energy work." If that were the case, everything would be energy work, and the term would be meaningless.
In our western culture, we have migrated away from ancient practices and beliefs about energy and whether it is real or where its presence is. Religious culture has tainted these beliefs as counter to "the miracle" of Christ, even though, Jesus himself practiced meditation, breath exercises, laying on of hands (reiki) and other of the lost arts.
Yes, laying on of hands has a long, long history, no doubt. And it can even have an effect - to have someone touch or hold you in a way that is meaningful can be profound, and will change the way that you feel, which can even subtly change what is happening in one's body. But this does not happen by means of biofields; this happens because the people involved experience tactile sensations, and attach meaning to those sensations. This is amazing, actually, but it's not energy work. It is a combination of physical and psychological processes that can be understood without positing a manipulation of vital force.
Do this little exercise. Close your eyes and rub your hands together until they are very warm. Then, move them toward each other, palms facing one another, as though you are forming a ball. Do this slowly and notice the results.
Do I separate them after rubbing them? And then, you want me to move them together, without quite touching?
Suppose I understand your instructions, and I follow them, and I DO sense something in my hands even though they are not quite touching. What would that indicate?
-
-
After going back into some of your prior discussions on this topic, I have to say I'm a little confused as to where you are going with your inquiry. I applaud your efforts to break down the idea of "energy work" as it applies to massage therapy into logical applications and scientific structural basis. So, I asked myself the question you posed to others throughout your discussion: Does a separate entity exist ?
Since you have refrained from opening this to a philosophical discussion, I'm just going to answer simply, at least from my standpoint, "yes". There exists a separate entity or vital force in the modality of energy work in massage therapy.
I'll also be so bold to add that not everyone can practice this modality. There is a significant amount of self awareness and higher consciousness work that needs to take place before a meaningful experience can happen in the laying on of hands. Also, I will say that those who are seeking energy work are also seeking the very thing you are seeming to deny exists. There evolves a trust, or belief, that there is help for whatever is disturbing their bodies outside the medical system as we know it. This also should be present in the receiver, but isn't absolutely necessary, as the exchange will occur whether they know it or not.
This isn't even pseudo science really. There have been scientific studies done that claim that a baby would die without the touch of another human. There is the Chinese system of Reiki that has been practiced for thousands of years and still is, with only a symbol as its focus, with "proven" positive results. Consider sexual energy and how ascetics withhold this energy in their spiritual work. Are all these instances proof of some kind of energy transference? I don't know. Should we discount them, even though the numbers point to some collective agreement? I don't know that either. However, they are compelling arguments.
Over the years that I have practiced yoga, I have seen things in my students and in myself that indicate the probability of a separate entity or vital force. I will admit that I have struggled with the question of whether my own brain was creating this awareness or whether it could be acknowledged without me. My conclusion is that there is no way to acknowledge a vital force without participation. It doesn't exist outside ourselves. I do think that it can be employed to gift to others through touch, but I also think, as I said before, a great deal of preparation of consciousness is necessary to do it properly.
I'm not a scientist and there are many great scientists who have done their best work so that I might use it. The question is, "am I worthy". Yes, I know this delves into the philosophical side of the discussion, but it is warranted. To force a discussion strictly around the science of touch is not only exhausting but incomplete. Perhaps you should be asking the group "why do energy work" to round out the question. That might give more people the opportunity to reply as to their own experiences and keep the science to a degree where it can be pursued at will.
If you need the science to reduce your skepticism to energy work, I would suggest you study Ayurvedic Medicine and meditation. I'm positive you'll find some answers there. You may not like them, - they may not fit the scientific model you are attached to, but they will live in you, if you so desire.
Deborah Herriage said:Christopher A. Moyer said:Hi Deborah. Welcome.
I don't know what your skepticism is based on or the history of the previous thread that was diverted. I'm assuming that you are skeptical because energy cannot be seen and its effects are not prominently displayed.
It's not essential that it be able to be seen. Magnetic fields cannot be seen by themselves, but we can still verify their existence. The forms of energy alleged to exist by proponents of energy work have not been verified. If these forms of energy did exist, verifying them would actually be a fairly trivial demonstration. It wouldn't require special technology - all we would need to do is to get energy work practitioners to give consistent reports of what they claim to detect under controlled conditions.
As an aside, I will also add that Thomas Edison was ridiculed and laughed at in his day before the world lit up. Check him out. (Also Nikola Tesla).
I'm familiar with both. It's also true that for every Edison or Tesla, whom some may have ridiculed, there are several dozen or hundreds of folks such as Gene Ray, who aren't onto something (but maybe on something). In other words, it's a logical fallacy to go from "Edison was ridiculed, but turned out to be right, ergo energy workers who are ridiculed will also turn out to be right."
Ahem, Ok, here I go: Energy work can NOT be discounted. Whether you are performing any massage, which is what I commonly refer to as "the laying on of hands" you are transferring some energy to the person you are touching, as they are to you. Energy moves in, out, around, over, under, and through us because we are also energetic fields, however dense, with more or less activity.
"We are energetic fields" is a very imprecise thing to say. I could agree that the human body stores, uses, and releases energy in various forms. I can't agree that we are energetic fields.
In yoga, the breath creates the cardiovascular response that is required to name "yoga" as an "exercise". It may seem trite, or even outrageous to make this claim, but breathing in and out is transferring energy. A metabolic process then moves energy around in the body, and releases toxins (also energy) and stimulates an energetic renewal to the brain (the brain becomes more active).
Breathing is important, and we can change the way we feel by changing the way we are breathing. But just because this process, or any other bodily process, involves metabolic systems, it does not follow that altering them is "energy work." If that were the case, everything would be energy work, and the term would be meaningless.
In our western culture, we have migrated away from ancient practices and beliefs about energy and whether it is real or where its presence is. Religious culture has tainted these beliefs as counter to "the miracle" of Christ, even though, Jesus himself practiced meditation, breath exercises, laying on of hands (reiki) and other of the lost arts.
Yes, laying on of hands has a long, long history, no doubt. And it can even have an effect - to have someone touch or hold you in a way that is meaningful can be profound, and will change the way that you feel, which can even subtly change what is happening in one's body. But this does not happen by means of biofields; this happens because the people involved experience tactile sensations, and attach meaning to those sensations. This is amazing, actually, but it's not energy work. It is a combination of physical and psychological processes that can be understood without positing a manipulation of vital force.
Do this little exercise. Close your eyes and rub your hands together until they are very warm. Then, move them toward each other, palms facing one another, as though you are forming a ball. Do this slowly and notice the results.
Do I separate them after rubbing them? And then, you want me to move them together, without quite touching?
Suppose I understand your instructions, and I follow them, and I DO sense something in my hands even though they are not quite touching. What would that indicate?
-
-
Great post and well said.
Marilyn St.John said:I also like the squirrel's viewpoint. While I form my own viewpoint about the scientific reasons for this supposed "energy flow" and the subsequent results I see, I'm the first to admit that I am ill-equipped to explain it. My personal observation has to do with fine vibrations (which I equate to sound vibrations) which compose every living thing. Perhaps the activity of "intention" causes vibrations to arise...which turn into atoms and generate what we call life. By the power of nature's affinity, the atoms group to form a living entity. As the breath manifests through the form, the body becomes conscious. Since the energy flow through my hand seems to speed things up when I am able to amplify it, there might be a connection.
If I have learned nothing else in my 60 years, it's that there is nothing as reliable as my own reality, and I'm quite lucid. I can't say that I am fan of organized religion, I think the necessity of a spiritual-creative component in this work remains. A friend of mine said, "spiritual literacy is the ability to read the signs within the texts of our own experiences. Whether viewed as a gift from God or a skill to be cultivated, this facility enables us to discern and decipher a world full of meaning."
So, I am just trying to connect the dots like so many others, and I certainly welcome the input of anyone with actual scientific data. Have we discovered who are the acknowledged experts in this field yet?
-
-
Deborah -
In your earlier post you concluded by suggesting an exercise one could do that would illustrate what you were trying to describe. I asked some follow up questions, but you didn't respond.
Specifically, you said:
Do this little exercise. Close your eyes and rub your hands together until they are very warm. Then, move them toward each other, palms facing one another, as though you are forming a ball. Do this slowly and notice the results.
I had the following questions. They are sincere questions - they are not merely rhetorical:
Do I separate them after rubbing them? And then, you want me to move them together, without quite touching?
Suppose I understand your instructions, and I follow them, and I DO sense something in my hands even though they are not quite touching. What would that indicate?
-
-
After going back into some of your prior discussions on this topic, I have to say I'm a little confused as to where you are going with your inquiry. I applaud your efforts to break down the idea of "energy work" as it applies to massage therapy into logical applications and scientific structural basis. So, I asked myself the question you posed to others throughout your discussion: Does a separate entity exist ?
Since you have refrained from opening this to a philosophical discussion,
This is true - I have tried to steer this away from becoming strictly a philosophical discussion. I actually like such discussions; it's just that I'd prefer to keep this discussion somewhat on topic.
I'm just going to answer simply, at least from my standpoint, "yes". There exists a separate entity or vital force in the modality of energy work in massage therapy.
Gotcha. I think many people, perhaps the majority, might answer this way. I would not, personally. But I'm not even sure it's critically important to the present topic, whether or not there is a vital force. The bottom line, where the present discussion is concerned, is whether or not the basis of energy modalities are demonstrable.
I'll also be so bold to add that not everyone can practice this modality. There is a significant amount of self awareness and higher consciousness work that needs to take place before a meaningful experience can happen in the laying on of hands. Also, I will say that those who are seeking energy work are also seeking the very thing you are seeming to deny exists. There evolves a trust, or belief, that there is help for whatever is disturbing their bodies outside the medical system as we know it. This also should be present in the receiver, but isn't absolutely necessary, as the exchange will occur whether they know it or not.
O.K., I still follow your explanation. I don't agree with it, but I can consider it as a possibility that would have ramifications for a scientific investigation if it was true. If we wanted to verify an energy medicine practice, it would be necessary to test the right people, according to this stipulation.
This isn't even pseudo science really.
Why the qualifier 'really'? It can either be falsified, or it cannot. Pseudoscience is typified by assertions that cannot be falsified.
There have been scientific studies done that claim that a baby would die without the touch of another human.
Partially correct. There is scientific evidence that shows touch and handling are critical for development. It does not follow that energy medicine is at work.
There is the Chinese system of Reiki that has been practiced for thousands of years
Two days, two weeks, two millenia - the persistence of the practice is no evidence of its effectiveness.
and still is, with only a symbol as its focus, with "proven" positive results.
"Proven"? What does it mean when you put the word in scare quotes? Is it proven, or not? If it's proven, where is the proof?
Consider sexual energy and how ascetics withhold this energy in their spiritual work. Are all these instances proof of some kind of energy transference? I don't know. Should we discount them, even though the numbers point to some collective agreement? I don't know that either. However, they are compelling arguments.
No they aren't. The reason they are not compelling is that there are other well-understood mechanisms that adequately explain the phenomena.
Over the years that I have practiced yoga, I have seen things in my students and in myself that indicate the probability of a separate entity or vital force. I will admit that I have struggled with the question of whether my own brain was creating this awareness or whether it could be acknowledged without me. My conclusion is that there is no way to acknowledge a vital force without participation. It doesn't exist outside ourselves. I do think that it can be employed to gift to others through touch, but I also think, as I said before, a great deal of preparation of consciousness is necessary to do it properly.
I'm not a scientist and there are many great scientists who have done their best work so that I might use it. The question is, "am I worthy". Yes, I know this delves into the philosophical side of the discussion, but it is warranted. To force a discussion strictly around the science of touch is not only exhausting but incomplete. Perhaps you should be asking the group "why do energy work" to round out the question.
It doesn't need to be rounded out. I can ask astrologers why they do astrology. I can ask dowsers why they dowse. Their answers will not help us determine if what they do actually does what they claim. The same is true in the present case. It could be an interesting sociological study to query energy workers about their motivations and goals - but it isn't of interest to me, nor will it help verify their claims in any way.
That might give more people the opportunity to reply as to their own experiences and keep the science to a degree where it can be pursued at will.
If you need the science to reduce your skepticism to energy work, I would suggest you study Ayurvedic Medicine and meditation. I'm positive you'll find some answers there. You may not like them, - they may not fit the scientific model you are attached to, but they will live in you, if you so desire.
As I've said before, I'm ready to change my mind. Really, I am! All it takes is evidence.
-
-
I'd like to present a hypothetical situation.
Imagine you are in the market to buy a used car. You find an ad that has what you think you are looking for, and you show up for a test drive. The car is really nice - it looks good, it's the right color, it's in good shape, it drives well, and the price is reasonable. You're thinking of buying it when it occurs to you to ask about the mileage.
You: How is the mileage?
Seller: Oh! I almost forgot. I'm glad you asked, because you're going to really like this. This is a reiki car. You never have to put gas in it. All you have to do is have a clear mind, and focused positive intentions, and this will enable the car to tap into the inexhaustible energy of the universe. The car will have all the energy it needs to take you wherever you need to go.
Would you believe the seller? Would you buy the car? Why or why not?
-
Permalink Reply by Julianna Holden Mohler on
-
Christopher A. Moyer said:I'd like to present a hypothetical situation.
Imagine you are in the market to buy a used car. You find an ad that has what you think you are looking for, and you show up for a test drive. The car is really nice - it looks good, it's the right color, it's in good shape, it drives well, and the price is reasonable. You're thinking of buying it when it occurs to you to ask about the mileage.
You: How is the mileage?
Seller: Oh! I almost forgot. I'm glad you asked, because you're going to really like this. This is a reiki car. You never have to put gas in it. All you have to do is have a clear mind, and focused positive intentions, and this will enable the car to tap into the inexhaustible energy of the universe. The car will have all the energy it needs to take you wherever you need to go.
Would you believe the seller? Would you buy the car? Why or why not?
The analogy doesn't work. Humans need fuel to run their bodies, and so do cars. If anyone claims they "give" energy to someone, they are mistaken. That person may feel energized or relaxed, but it's not because there's been an exchange.
-
Permalink Reply by Serge Rivest on
-
People on the "energy work" side have really poor arguments.
Look folks, before writing your arguments, make sure they are not logical fallacies: http://www.logicalfallacies.info/
So far we got: Ad Hominem and Appeal to Antiquity / Tradition to name a few. These are not valid arguments.
An if you mention a study, please reference it. This whole "there are studies about babies ..." this is not credible if you can't point to that study so we can have a look at it. There is a difference between an invented story to make you believe in "the power of touch" and an actual study. And even then, the study has to be done properly, there are such things as poor studies.
It's ok to mention that you've read somewhere something, but don't imply that "this is a fact".
Christopher A. Moyer said:After going back into some of your prior discussions on this topic, I have to say I'm a little confused as to where you are going with your inquiry. I applaud your efforts to break down the idea of "energy work" as it applies to massage therapy into logical applications and scientific structural basis. So, I asked myself the question you posed to others throughout your discussion: Does a separate entity exist ?
Since you have refrained from opening this to a philosophical discussion,
This is true - I have tried to steer this away from becoming strictly a philosophical discussion. I actually like such discussions; it's just that I'd prefer to keep this discussion somewhat on topic.
I'm just going to answer simply, at least from my standpoint, "yes". There exists a separate entity or vital force in the modality of energy work in massage therapy.
Gotcha. I think many people, perhaps the majority, might answer this way. I would not, personally. But I'm not even sure it's critically important to the present topic, whether or not there is a vital force. The bottom line, where the present discussion is concerned, is whether or not the basis of energy modalities are demonstrable.
I'll also be so bold to add that not everyone can practice this modality. There is a significant amount of self awareness and higher consciousness work that needs to take place before a meaningful experience can happen in the laying on of hands. Also, I will say that those who are seeking energy work are also seeking the very thing you are seeming to deny exists. There evolves a trust, or belief, that there is help for whatever is disturbing their bodies outside the medical system as we know it. This also should be present in the receiver, but isn't absolutely necessary, as the exchange will occur whether they know it or not.
O.K., I still follow your explanation. I don't agree with it, but I can consider it as a possibility that would have ramifications for a scientific investigation if it was true. If we wanted to verify an energy medicine practice, it would be necessary to test the right people, according to this stipulation.
This isn't even pseudo science really.
Why the qualifier 'really'? It can either be falsified, or it cannot. Pseudoscience is typified by assertions that cannot be falsified.
There have been scientific studies done that claim that a baby would die without the touch of another human.
Partially correct. There is scientific evidence that shows touch and handling are critical for development. It does not follow that energy medicine is at work.
There is the Chinese system of Reiki that has been practiced for thousands of years
Two days, two weeks, two millenia - the persistence of the practice is no evidence of its effectiveness.
and still is, with only a symbol as its focus, with "proven" positive results.
"Proven"? What does it mean when you put the word in scare quotes? Is it proven, or not? If it's proven, where is the proof?
Consider sexual energy and how ascetics withhold this energy in their spiritual work. Are all these instances proof of some kind of energy transference? I don't know. Should we discount them, even though the numbers point to some collective agreement? I don't know that either. However, they are compelling arguments.
No they aren't. The reason they are not compelling is that there are other well-understood mechanisms that adequately explain the phenomena.
Over the years that I have practiced yoga, I have seen things in my students and in myself that indicate the probability of a separate entity or vital force. I will admit that I have struggled with the question of whether my own brain was creating this awareness or whether it could be acknowledged without me. My conclusion is that there is no way to acknowledge a vital force without participation. It doesn't exist outside ourselves. I do think that it can be employed to gift to others through touch, but I also think, as I said before, a great deal of preparation of consciousness is necessary to do it properly.
I'm not a scientist and there are many great scientists who have done their best work so that I might use it. The question is, "am I worthy". Yes, I know this delves into the philosophical side of the discussion, but it is warranted. To force a discussion strictly around the science of touch is not only exhausting but incomplete. Perhaps you should be asking the group "why do energy work" to round out the question.
It doesn't need to be rounded out. I can ask astrologers why they do astrology. I can ask dowsers why they dowse. Their answers will not help us determine if what they do actually does what they claim. The same is true in the present case. It could be an interesting sociological study to query energy workers about their motivations and goals - but it isn't of interest to me, nor will it help verify their claims in any way.
That might give more people the opportunity to reply as to their own experiences and keep the science to a degree where it can be pursued at will.
If you need the science to reduce your skepticism to energy work, I would suggest you study Ayurvedic Medicine and meditation. I'm positive you'll find some answers there. You may not like them, - they may not fit the scientific model you are attached to, but they will live in you, if you so desire.
As I've said before, I'm ready to change my mind. Really, I am! All it takes is evidence.
-
-
Thanks for bringing up the issue of logical fallacies, Serge. There have been quite a few in the last several posts.
Nevertheless, I noticed you attached your post to the exchange between Deborah and myself, which so far has been a reasonable one. Speaking for myself, Deborah's viewpoint is welcome, and I hope that she will participate further. I don't want Deborah's couple of posts to look like the scapegoat for all the logical fallacies in this 370+ post thread. :)
© 2024 Created by ABMP.
Powered by
