View Single Post
Old 08-07-2013, 03:25 PM   #36
OwlMatt's Avatar
Dojo: Milwaukee Aikikai
Location: Wisconsin
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 401
Re: Ki energy defined

Ron Ragusa wrote: View Post
I read two hypotheses that Corky put forward. First he hypothesizes that the four forces of nature are different manifestations of a single fundamental force that he chooses to label Ki. To my knowledge, scant though it may be, science has yet to explain the unification of the four forces, so I guess you're not talking about that.

He then goes on to assert in a second hypothesis that there is a fifth manifestation of Ki, namely spiritual energy. Among other things, this fifth force is supposedly responsible for bridging the gap between living and non-living matter. Again, and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, I do not believe science has been able to explain how non-living organic compounds can combine to form living organisms.

Since science has explained neither of these things perhaps you could be more specific in your critique.

Also, one can hypothesize to one's heart's content without having to as you say "...prove the existence and function of this "energy", you also need to disprove existing science." Einstein used mathematical metaphors and thought experiments to develop the Special and General Theories of Relativity but never did a lick of work trying to prove or disprove them experimentally. He also did not have to disprove Newtonian Mechanics since he showed how classical mechanics was a special case of his more general theories.
There are scientific theories for how inert compounds come together to form living things, yes. But more to the point, in order to claim that there is an "energy" that does this, one must first explain how what we call life is more than just a complex system of inert compounds. We know what makes blood pump, we know what makes muscles contract, we're even starting to understand how the brain works, so what need have we for this "energy" to explain anything? And what's more, how does one come to understand molecular biology by training aikido?

BTW, Einstein's gravity (which is a curvature of space caused by mass) did disprove and replace Newton's gravity (which is a force).
Please write that sentence down, put it in a sealed bottle and bury it in your back yard. If your still studying Aikido in 25 or 30 years dig it up, reread it and see how you feel about it.

You've made this argument with me before, and it's hard to read it as anything but a cop-out. If you think I'm wrong, explain why. Simply telling me that I'll understand someday is presumptuous and painfully condescending and says nothing of any substance.

Last edited by OwlMatt : 08-07-2013 at 03:33 PM.