Talk:Reiki
|
Metadata here |
Wonder how fellow Philosophy Workgroup authors feel about this being in our purview?
Perhaps it's the materialist/positivist inside me speaking, but I feel slightly uncomfortable having this in the Philosophy Workgroup. Anyone got any strong opinions on it being here or not? I'd probably go with removing philosophy from the list of article categories. --Tom Morris 12:46, 28 June 2008 (CDT)
Skepticism and FIXME"?
I'm not sure what the FIXMEs are supposed to be.
"The ritual of a reiki healing, as well as the sympathetic ear of the reiki practitioner, are the cause of the benefit rather than the reiki energy.<ref>Skeptic's Dictionary, [http://www.skepdic.com/reiki.html reiki]</ref>" Sorry, the Skeptic's Dictionary is not authoritative about the mechanism, or lack of mechanism, of reiki. It should be reasonably practical to do sham ritual and do randomized controlled trials.
No, this should not be Philosophy, but Health Sciences.
Howard C. Berkowitz 04:03, 25 June 2009 (UTC)