I think people should be careful doing Reiki

[lottieandmia22]

This post assumes a belief in spirituality so I'm not interested in debating that specifically. If you want to please start your own thread.

From what I can see, reiki is channeling occult energy through people's bodies and is therefore potentially risky. It seems to me that new age practitioners will repeatedly say they don't believe in malevolent entities but I think this is naive.

One of my friends told me that his dad was never the same after he became involved with reiki.

And also nearly everyone I've met who has done it was told by the reiki practitioner that they are 'special' have a 'gift' or could easily become a reiki master.

Yes I do. Thats my point, it is a good definition of the word, but your application of it to Reiki is wrong.

And I said Reiki includes its own philosophy at its crux because it involves believing very specific things about reality (energy fields), how they can affect our health and be manipulated by practitioners.

And I asked you what that philosophy was, and you started quoting definitions of the word philosophy that do not apply.

I asked you what philosophy Reiki fits in to, Can I assume you do not know?

And you own quote, bfg :

The life force is responsive to thoughts and feelings. It becomes disrupted when we accept, either consciously or unconsciously, negative thoughts or feelings about ourselves. These negative thoughts and feelings attach themselves to the energy field and cause a disruption in the flow of life force. This diminishes the vital function of the organs and cells of the physical body

How can you say this does not relate to beliefs concerning knowledge, reality and existence?

I asked you what philosophy Reiki fits in to, Can I assume you do not know?

bfg I said it does not have to fit into a particular kind of philosophy for it to be one! There are not a finite number of philosophies! Or even an authoritative list of recognised and non recognised ones.

YANBU, & I say that as someone who was Reiki attuned & suffered as a result. Too often they don't teach how to shut those channels down, leaving you vulnerable to spiritual attack.

It's a little odd. Science cannot see or measure what Reiki practitioners are attempting to do. I get that. Reiki practitioners shouldn't be claiming to cure disease. Agreed.

Some people who have or give Reiki feel experience things that science doesn't, can't, measure. I don't care why. I don't care if you think those people are deluded.

People suffer from psychosomatic illness all the time, those illnesses often follow symptoms of existing illness. Reiki could be a psychosomatic remedy, and there is nothing wrong with that.

Anyway, I'm out because the conversation I was interested in isn't t happening.

What science says about Reiki:
"Several groups of experts have evaluated the evidence on Reiki, and all of them have concluded that it’s uncertain whether Reiki is helpful.

Only a small number of studies of Reiki have been completed, and most of them included only a few people. Different studies looked at different health conditions making it hard to compare their results. Many of the studies didn’t compare Reiki with both sham (simulated) Reiki and with no treatment. Studies that include both of these comparisons are usually the most informative."

“Anyway, I'm out because the conversation I was interested in isn't t happening.”

Can I ask what conversation you wanted to happen?

Oh look..someone quoting Einstein. How very novel. As ever, he's not saying what the quoter thinks he's said. Also, appeals to authority are a little lame and never used by anyone with anything sensible to say.

And the smug little "oh, it's so ignorant to think that because something can't be proved to be true it isn't" displays such ignorance itself that I can't bring myself to feel offended by it. No idea what "atheist leaning" is supposed to mean, though or how it pertains.

*Magpie
*
Reikki is not philosophy. I do wish you'd read the definitions you keep posting on here. Philopsophy is the study OF a something...not the something itself. Science, for example, is not a philosophy but lots of philosophers think & talk about it.

Actually, I don't think you've been rude so much as childishly angry. You accused me being rude purely because I didn't accept your arguments. Nearly all the bad feeling on this thread has come from you.

Every day's a learning day For some of us.

How far down Google did you have to go to find that, Dione?

It was the first thing that Google offered. From nccih.nih.gov/health/reiki/introduction.htm

Ha ha...that was taken off a website called National Centre for Complementary and Intergrative Health.

So, people who already believe bullshit and who are not scientists.

sciencebasedmedicine.org/reiki/ (Conclusion: reikki is shit).

From the Science Based Medicine site.

That was the first hit I got Googling, "Reikki & science".

An actual scientific research paper:

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21531671 (Conclusion: reikki is shit and probably does more harm than good....although having a nurse provide one to one care is helpful).

Reikki is not philosophy. I do wish you'd read the definitions you keep posting on here. Philopsophy is the study OF a something...not the something itself. Science, for example, is not a philosophy but lots of philosophers think & talk about it.

Tabby, maybe I should have included more of the OED definition. See the example sentence labelled 1:2 below:

Example sentences
1.1count noun A particular system of philosophical thought.
'the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle’
More example sentences
1.2 The study of the theoretical basis of a particular branch of knowledge or experience.
‘the philosophy of science’
More example sentencesSynonyms
2A theory or attitude that acts as a guiding principle for behaviour.
'don't expect anything and you won't be disappointed, that's my philosophy’

(https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/philosophy)

So according to the OED, science is a philosophy! Just as Reiki has its own particular philosophy underlying its practice which involves a particular view on reality and existence.

Actually, I don't think you've been rude so much as childishly angry. You accused me being rude purely because I didn't accept your arguments. Nearly all the bad feeling on this thread has come from you.

Why do you consider me childish? I said you were rude because you were attempting to parody what you thought what I would say in a given situation. When you don't know me and the parody bore little relation to what I had said in my posts. Now that is something children do, in my experience.

"The National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH) is a United States government agency which investigates complementary and alternative medicine ( CAM)."

The "actual scientific paper" you linked to is one of the studies referenced in the overview I linked to. I have c&p the findings conclusions below. Nowhere does it say thatit probably does more harm than good so where did you get that from?

"FINDINGS:
Although Reiki therapy was statistically significant in raising the comfort and well-being of patients post-therapy, the sham Reiki placebo also was statistically significant. Patients in the standard care group did not experience changes in comfort and well-being during their infusion session.
CONCLUSIONS:
The findings indicate that the presence of an RN providing one-on-one support during chemotherapy was influential in raising comfort and well-being levels, with or without an attempted healing energy field."

Science Based Medicine is a blog.

How can you say this does not relate to beliefs concerning knowledge, reality and existence?

Not everything that relates to those things is a philosophy. Put down the dictionary and actually think for a minute.

Everyone here actually knows reiki is bunkum. You know that. why argue?

It collates and reports on scientific research.
That's what the NCCIH does. Only it is a government agency that is run by scientists, not an individual's blog. You linked to a study (that was referenced in the NCCIH overview). You stated the conclusion was reikki is shit and probably does more harm than good.... I have c&p the actual findings and conclusions from the study. Can you tell me where you got the probably does more harm than good... bit from?

Everyone here actually knows reiki is bunkum. You know that. why argue?

Everyone here actually knows reiki is bunkum. You know that. why argue?

You & your cronies are not everyone, just a snapshot of people who are not experienced in such matters & therefore closed minded. You are right in there being no point in arguing that though. Why bang your head on a brick wall.

It's people like you two that make people like me think that every woo fool is as thick as shit.

I take no responsibility for your belief that you are superior(?) or more clever than people who do woo. It existed before this thread.