In elaborating on your original point, I think you are still missing some elements of evidential support to support your claims. It sounds like you dismiss the need for evidential support, citing instead the need to (ahhhh) "feel it":
There are many people with lots of data. Data, data data. To me they are walking libraries, computers, robots. Don't get me wrong I like robots and computers but I could give you all the data and history and meanings and variances according to traditions and climate to do with trying to get you to understand the taste of a strawberry but until you've eaten one you will never know.
But the point is you can confirm strawberries taste sweet; the point of contention would be how sweet and what flavor of sweetness. For the sake of your argument, I am willing to concede that ki exists as an energy form. However, I think you do not built a case sufficient to explain how ki can possess a trait (kindness). Kindness is a emotive state of being. You do not explain how ki, conditional upon accepting it possesses a emotive state, can possess a singular emotion (positive in connotation). This is (I think) what some of the other posters are hinting at... Your interpretation of ki is somewhat different than most and asserted without any supporting evidence. Which is fine, but your posts imply you derived your comments from some factual base that you are withholding from this thread.
Secondly, O'Sensei simply did not say many things attributed to him. In these paraphrases, most often his comments were translated to English, then interpreted in their meaning; sometimes both being performed by the same person. I would expect that in interpreting O'Sensei's teachings, you should at least provide the paraphrase or quote used in your interpretation. Again, your posts imply that you have confirmed factual quotations and historical information from OSensei that support your position but you are withholding this information as well.
Your beliefs are your own. But I think if you choose to share them as part of a discussion you would like to share how you arrived at your educated decisions.
If a person was to show how a spiritual principle applies to a physical action would that be preaching?
Preaching is the presentation of [religious] doctrine, a sermon. This is a tongue and cheek comment to raise caution about presenting an idea for discussion to a group of like-minded individuals who will not questions the statements validity (as in "preaching to the choir" to describe the preacher speaking to the only regular members in church...the choir). If you choose to present and idea as fact beyond your group of like-minded individuals, you should darn well be able to back up that comment.