Jump to content

Recommended Posts



Am I being mean if I ask what that assumption is based on? Looking at the site you suggested I read:


"When you read about Reiki in books or on the Internet you will find several different theories about where Reiki came from: the stars, Lemuria, Atlantis, Egypt, India, Tibet etc. What we do know for a fact is that Reiki was "rediscovered" in Japan by Dr Mikao Usui during the beginning of the 20th century."


The stars? Atlantis?


And then this from the official Scientology website:

"In Scientology no one is asked to accept anything as belief or on faith. That which is true for you is what you have observed to be true. An individual discovers for himself that Scientology works by personally applying its principles and observing or experiencing results."


I know it seems as if we are all having a go, and I guess that's even true, but it is obviously something you feel heartfelt about so I'm just keen to understand the differences? Can you least see that us skeptics might have a reason for being confused ?

I suggest that you receive some Reiki, and then I suggest that you pop down to your local friendly scientology church, attending a 'meeting' and see the difference for yourself. Skeptics can only discover the truth by experience. Experience them both and then come back on this forum and tell us what you observed.


Reiki comes form the energy in the atmosphere that we all are linked to. Everything has an energy. Reiki uses that energy.


Scientology comes from aliens....

fractionater Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> As a scientific man I'm surprised that Dwarkin

> didn't draw parallels with the Quantum Physics

> princinpal whereby observing an experiment can

> affect its outcome


As I understand it, the effects of quantum mechanics are only really relevant on an atomic scale. It certainly doesn't scale to things like cats (as in Schrodinger's famous metahpor), or a person sitting in a room observing a patient.



> since we have no Scientific understanding of the

> actual Scientific processes involved during some

> of these alternative methods then how can we

> accurately measure them and draw conclusions with

> our current limited understanding?


I would have thought it is fairly easy to test whether a remedy actually works... ie a double-blind trial. Why should certain practises be exepmt from this?



> If more scientific research were carried out in

> these areas then we'd all be better informed.


That would be an excellent idea, do you think many practitioners would volunteer for it?



> Trying to debunk something based on current

> understanding is wrong....just like the world used

> to be flat!


Yes, everybody believed that the earth was flat, until it was proved otherwise... which I think is fair enough. Similarly many of us will remain unconvinced by certain new-age healing practises, voodoo, magic, god, etc until there is some sort of proof.

> Skeptics can only discover the truth by experience


not really, you can make decisions based on evidence and scientific reasoning. The sun's a long way away, never been there and measured it myself but I know that because of the facts I have learnt in my life. And no I won't continue questioning those facts because I want the world and mankind to progress and it's hard to do so when progress is held back by magic.

Even with my limited knowledge I don't expect the practice of Reiki and Scientology to be REMOTELY similar (I love putting those caps in - CitizenEd gets upset if I don't). I know that you have no wish to indoctrinate anyone and you have no plans to open an office on Tottenham Court Rd


The point I'm trying to make is that the defence of both sounds very similar. It sounds as if you are as sceptical about Scientology as I am - however it's the foundations, philosophy, whatver you call it which underpins them appears to be.... trying to choose a non-prejudicial word... ach I'll say it - flaky


The whole "I have seen results and helped many people" thing I can get - but the belief system behind it.. hmmm. Why would I need to believe that some vague spirit from Atlantis or possibly the stars, channeled by 3 people in the 20th century into a "cohesive" philosophy before I can be healed? That's the bit I don't get

I've noticed that there does seem to be a misapprehension on here that science is some sort of exclusive, gnostic, patriarchal conspiracy that feels threatened by the wonder of spirituality and mysticism.

I can't quite square the circle there.


The whole point of science is that it is always open to attempts to debunk or disprove. Theories are hypothesised, tested and hopefully proved or disproved, or at least held to be a satisfactory work in progress until subsequent research deems otherwise.

Indeed in attempting to disprove theories scientists often end up proving them despite themselves, such as millikan's attempt to disprove Einstein's particulate-wave theory of light. After a few years of research he not only proved it correct, but calculated the value of Planck's constant...good work fella.


Through science we've eradicated many diseases, made huge medical advances, found treatments or cures for many cancers. We take it for granted that we can be anywhere in the world within a day, we can talk to each other anywhere on earth, we can watch important events unfold before our eyes as they happen.

I can't say as witchs' brews or acupuncture have done much about smallpox or malaria.


Scientists don't deplore the teaching of religion in schools, but of the reverse this cannot be said. Religion and superstition see science as a threat, not the other way round. Well, in the states anyway, C of E and even the Catholics actually recognise evolution as the best theory, they just like to see the hand of god in it, as it is, presumably, in everything.


Science doesn't have to deny things that aren't understood, but it retains the right to test them, cats in boxes or uncertainty principles aside (well, not aside really, how nice that quantum physicists introduce these elements of doubt rather than zealot preachers).


If scientific thought and methodology is open to question, then why should other ways of thinking not be so.

hang on, I just counter-whatevered your statement "Skeptics can only discover the truth by experience" by saying "The sun's a long way away ... I know that because of the facts...." which means you're wrong. Do you agree? If so then I shall tell you what I mean by that bit about magic, if not tell me why I'm wrong and I'll probably tell you what I mean by that bit about magic.


[edited once]

In my mind, MY mind, skeptics can only discover the truth through experience. That is the way I personally see it. Therefore Mark, it is not on for you to tell me I 'am wrong' and try to get me to make some admission of such on this forum.


The part about magic and that it holds back mankind and progress, is your point of view. Hypnotherpay however can be seen as a form a magic, can't it?


When people start throwing in quotes from theoriests it gets a little too much.


I'm loosing the will to live with this now.


I'm sure the likes of Capt_Birdseye (closet banker) will have something to say about this, which I'm not going to allow me to upset or hot under the collar about.



I was criticising your debating "skills" not your beliefs or indeed your job. I have by no means a closed mind to some of these alternative therapies but would like to know more about them so that I can make a sound judgement on them. You seem to get hot under the collar quite a lot and come across as being particularly thin-skinned as well as hypocritical in the way you don't like any criticisms of your work but are quite happy to belittle other professions.

I appologise about my debating skills. I never went to any debating clubs at college. Alot of people on here go round in circles and try to amaze with their use of the English language, which quite frankly at the end of the day, means bugger all. Hot under the collar? I've already been down this route with another forumite (you know I know who you are!)


I have said some things on here that have been deliberatly contentious to see what reactions I would get. That's allowed isn't it?

I want to continue this discussion because it genuinely interests me - but I'm loathe to do it at the moment because it seems like ten of us stacked up against one person. (even if that person admits saying some contentious things and then threatens to leave when people rise to the bait. every time ;-) )


So... shall we, for the moment, remove Reiki from the debate and return to the programme in question. The first episode showed lot's of average-Joe and Josepehines with their beliefs being shot down by a slightly supercilious Prof. The second one appears to be looking at some bigger issues. The prof. in question also has a well-known bee in his bonnet about religion (which is not unrelated to the current show)


I don't happen to like what I've seen about HIM, but I do pretty much agree with most of what he is saying. It's all very well having our subjective beliefs but when our national leaders admit to being "think with your gut kind of guys" and taking us to war, not on evidence but on beliefs then surely it's a subject that should interest us all??

Finally a voice of reason.


That's exactly the issue. I have no problem with people holding different beliefs, it's when president of an fundamentalist evangelical bent allow their hotline to god to govern policy and when a Prime Minister who hangs around in Mayan birthing pools and values creationism in the science class joins said president on a 'crusade' of all things, then we really do need to worry.

Depends on what the subject is (after mutating over several pages!)


But if the subject is still the programme and why was he "shooting fish in a barrel" then I don't think we are changing the subject... If we accept (to borrow a phrase) that people buy into "mumbo-jumbo" then it's very easy for anyone in authority to have influence over them. Of course what constitutes "mumbo-jumbo" is the very issue. Very occassionally I will read a horoscope. For the cliched "laugh". I have never evver taken it seriously.

Some of my friends do.... which creeps me out. I'll do something and they will say "oh that is sooo like a Libran" - no it isn't!

Not really [Keef], as far as I've read this is the thrust of his argument. That if people aren't being rational in their day to day actions, then how can we expect them to be rational in their choices of politics and policies and politicians.

And how can we voters then expect those politicians to behave rationally.


He's saying, in his horribly sibilant tones, that mediums aren't actually harmless, they're contributing to a dangerous blindspot in the social fabric.


You only have to look at the States (where else) to look at the red states, poor, agrarian, vulnerable, who vote in their droves for a republican party that appeals to their twisted morals but actually sells them down the river or sends them off to war (down a river perhaps) for their buddies in big business and the military.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Thanks for stating the bleeding obvious
    • Yes, they are intelligent ❤️ Various methods of deterring the foxes (aka stopping them coming and crapping on your lawn) have been suggested in this thread. If you don't want to try them, and prefer to keep clearing up the crap and complaining about it, well that's YOUR choice 🙄
    • Weather going to be hot from today thru to weekend so I hope all dog owners walk their pooches early in the morning or in the cool of the evening. Woofers can survive the odd day without going for walkies in the heat or having to race around with their pack in the heat. Try brain games with them around the house - hid treats for them to find, given them a kong..  Mental stimulation is as good and beneficial as walkies and does tire them out.     And whilst on the subject of heat and dogs, do remember that leaving a couple of windows open while you run into a shop etc to get groceries etc …. Is not good enough / the inside of a car obviously gets very very hot… and one could be delayed in ship, thru no fault of your own - meanwhile, your woofer is suffering.  Common sense really and if you are a new owner, probably really never thought it through ie walking dogs in heat or leaving them in car in heat. The majority of people on this site are caring, supportive people only offering advice, expressing concern when they see stupidity.  
    • Weirdly (well, weird as it happened very shortly after I had posted that) I got a notice the other day (the first time in the near enough twenty years since I joined the forum) telling me I had reached my limit of "reactions". I posted a screenshot on here. However I did not actually seem be prevented  from  making any more!   What is your purpose in doing that? This is a useful, long running and well loved (by me, anyway) local forum. It provides information on matters of local interest, an opportunity to easily sell or give away  unwanted things and buy or be given things you want, information on upcoming local events and interest groups. It is also a well moderated place to discuss both local and wider issues. And it is used by a variety of different kinds of people, as would be expected - we all have different personalities, experiences and opinions, and that's part of what makes the forum such a great local asset. Since rescuing the forum when the previous admin left - it could have disappeared altogether - Joe has put and continues to put an enormous amount of work into setting it up on a different platform (?) , maintaining it, and keeping it a safe and pleasant place for everyone using it. I'm sure you and others will correct me if I'm wrong, but it feels to me that dissecting "posters and their patterns" in the way you describe - presumably then to post the results on here?  - is just going to sow seeds of discord which could stop some people posting altogether and generally change the whole nature of the forum. I think that would be very sad, and I hope that that isn't your intention? Are you going to include your own posts in this? You have joined the forum relatively recently, and seem to be self-described as a "Pain".
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...