It is not a vague pliable concept that can be applied to whatever end you want.
Specifically, applying a vague notion of energy has been used to provide some sort of specious pseudo-scientific support to many bullshit ideas, including the following: ghosts (left-over energy), auras (psychic energy - or worse: electromagnetic field energy), raw food diets (food loses energy cooking - or similarly the "grass-has-more-energy-than-the-cow-eating-it" line of argument for vegitarianism), powers attributed to crystals, geometric shapes (pyramids) and such, astrology.
The point is this: by appealing to 'energy' in any similarly fallacious claim, you are not supporting it. In fact, you are not saying anything at all, as your notion of energy is underspecified to the point of meaninglessness. Appealing to the 'energy' of a crystal is really just restating that it has whatever other powers you were trying to attribute to it in the first place. It is reduced to a tautology. You might as well just say it has magic powers.
Energy is not mysterious; it cannot be made to do whatever you want. Please stop doing such violence to a concept that science has worked extremely hard to solidify and quantify over millennia.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
"auras (psychic energy - or worse: electromagnetic field energy)"
haha... Did someone in particular pop into your head as you typed this reason down?
this posting is both shocking and appalling, i bid good night to you sir, enjoy your stay...
I am merely defending scientific rigor, sir (or as the British and Canadians say: rigour). I mean not to stifle creativity of concepts or revolutionary science. But really. I mean, read a few pamphlets or websites on any of these topics and tell me it is a well thought out concept.
i would you madmardigan! but i have narcopamphlepticosis and am still stapling them together to form a larger book that won't make me drowsy with spicy warmth!
Post a Comment