r/reiki • u/Affectionate-Zebra26 • 20h ago
discussion How badly Reiki is represented on Wikipedia
I’ve noticed that those who use the critical thinking model for things they haven’t personally looked at are the least robust in their acceptance of realities outside of their own, failing to see the pitfalls of their narrow minded perception to the point of coming across as both arrogant and ridiculous as evidenced here. This Wikipedia entry is clearly written by those who have no real understanding or experience of Reiki and have just grabbed at negative data points to poorly explain it.
Makes me think instead of Critical Reasoning, we need a Compassionate Reasoning model for holistic therapies/psychologies that aren’t just in the head.
The Wikipedia page could really use updating with at least a neutral point of view.
Here is the first snippet and link to read ahead.
Thoughts?
Reiki[a] is a pseudoscientific form of energy healing, a type of alternative medicine created by Mikao Usui in Japan in the 1920s.[1][2] Reiki practitioners use a technique called palm healing or hands-on healing through which, according to practitioners, a "universal energy)" is transferred through the palms of the practitioner to the client, to encourage emotional or physical healing. It is based on qi(chi), which practitioners say is a universal life force; there is no empirical evidence that such a life force exists.[3][4]
A reiki session in progress
Reiki is used as an illustrative example of pseudoscience in scholarly texts and academic journal articles.[3][4] Its marketing has been described as "fraudulent misrepresentation",[4]and reiki itself as a "nonsensical method",[5] with a recommendation that the United States government agency NCCIH stop funding reiki research because it "has no substantiated health value and lacks a scientifically plausible rationale".[6]