OK, time to air out a pet peeve of mine. But first, a little bit of semantics.
literal
Quote:
|
adj 1: being or reflecting the essential or genuine character of something; "her actual motive"; "a literal solitude like a desert"- G.K.Chesterton; "a genuine dilemma" [syn: actual, genuine, real] 2: without interpretation or embellishment; "a literal translation of the scene before him" 3: limited to the explicit meaning of a word or text; "a literal translation" [ant: figurative]
|
figurative
Quote:
|
Based on or making use of figures of speech; metaphorical: figurative language.
Containing many figures of speech; ornate.
Represented by a figure or resemblance; symbolic or emblematic.
|
OK, now that that's clear...
I have this pet peeve about the usage of the word "energy." Aikido Sensei's and many others in the holistic health field talk about "energy" in the "figurative" sense, yet they use it literally. One recent case was a movie-night where we were watching a film with O Sensei, and one viewer commented that O Sensei's "energy" "leapt" off the screen.
I'm willing to bet dollars to donuts that if I had a geiger counter or other energy recording device there: I'd have gotten the same reading from that film than if I showed a film of a potted plant (but in all fairness to the speaker: perhaps he WAS speaking figuratively).
I've heard even sillier examples in non-Aikido contexts. Perhaps the grand prize of silliness was in a work context. One co-worker complained how all Managers at the Front Desk seemed to "absorb" this "negative energy," because they all, in time, became irrational and short-tempered, no matter how good-natured they were, when they took the job.
This pasty-brained idea ignored the fact that the owner was a verbally abusive pill who often filled these poor Managers' days with earfuls of stress and headache courtesy of long-distance, several times a week. Little wonder that they all cracked, in the end: "energy" had little to do with it.
And so, I once tried an experiment: during one basics class I went on and on about how there IS no mysterious "energy" that I "absorb" from uke, etc: it was all physics and perfectly explainable. I then went on to demonstrate the technique, and left them to it. But, in attempting to practice, my students struggled harder; they seemed less joyous in what they were doing, and all in all they weren't getting the principles of what I wanted to convey.
After that, I said "OK, forget what I just said: imagine that you ARE absorbing energy from uke and transforming it into something else." My students' faces were more relaxed and generally seemed to enjoy the practice, more.
So, were my students ACTUALLY doing "energy-work?" Personally, I don't think so. But what was going on?
IMO, the use of "energy" is a "frame:" an aspect of the precognitive. That is: it evokes a picture in the mind, to help the body more effectively practice Aikido. George Lakoff talks about the use of words and framing very well, in a political context.
Simple Framing
Quote:
|
An introduction to framing and its uses in politics.
Carry out the following directive:
Don't think of an elephant!
It is, of course, a directive that cannot be carried out — and that is the point. In order to purposefully not think of an elephant, you have to think of an elephant. There are four morals.
Moral 1. Every word evokes a frame.
A frame is a conceptual structure used in thinking. The word elephant evokes a frame with an image of an elephant and certain knowledge: an elephant is a large animal (a mammal) with large floppy ears, a trunk that functions like both a nose and a hand, large stump-like legs, and so on.
Moral 2: Words defined within a frame evoke the frame.
The word trunk, as in the sentence "Sam picked up the peanut with his trunk," evokes the Elephant frame and suggests that "Sam" is the name of an elephant.
Moral 3: Negating a frame evokes the frame.
Moral 4: Evoking a frame reinforces that frame.
Every frame is realized in the brain by neural circuitry. Every time a neural circuit is activated, it is strengthened.
|
And so, by exhorting my students to "ignore the 'energy' idea; I was telling them to work at cross-purposes...I was conjuring it in their minds, and telling them to work against it.
So, what do you think? I am still exploring this idea of framing, both in political dialogue, and when I teach Aikido. IS the use of "energy" ultimately positive, or detrimental, especially when it is meant literally?