I received the following comments from Fred, a man who read my essay, Thoughts on Love: the Greatest Power.
> So it is fearful to be skeptical of pseudoscience,
Of course not. It’s fearful to attempt to put an idea that you don’t agree, or understand with down.
Whether it is science or pseudo science, it is your conclusion that it does not work, that makes it not work for you.
> but loving to give up critical thinking?
Being loving has nothing to do with critical thinking, and critical thinking has nothing to do with being critical. They’re two very different things. A person can be genuinely curious, and still think critically. In fact, they should think critically when taking in new information.
>So it is loving to believe in applied kinesiology,
No… it is intelligent to be open to the possibility, taking an open minded look at the results of a wide body of experience from many reputable sources. It’s intelligent to respect the sincere intent behind their efforts.
The CIA and certain branches of the military — on both sides of the Cold War — employed “remote viewers” to gain remarkable information about far distant, inaccessible places. While there is no “science” that claims remote viewing among its disciplines, the practice certainly demonstrated itself to work for those who were open to it. Kinesiological testing is the same way if you don’t allow doubts and fears to short-circuit your power to learn.
Some people seek to disprove the efficacy of kinesological testing, and therefore structure experiences to “prove” their point. They will always be slaves to the next “authority,” but never trust their own inner voice. Others wish to benefit from what kinesiological testing allows. And they do. You don’t have to believe it for me to benefit from it. My telling you it works won’t make it work for you, if you’re closed to the possibility.
> but fearful to state factually that it has been disproved in double-blind studies?
The purpose of double-blind studies is to give skeptics something negative to believe in. Purpose served. The real “double blind” would be the people who design double-blind studies, along with those who participate in them.
> Love speaks the truth, it does not cower in fear.
If that is your belief, then we are in agreement here.
> God bless.
Thank you. You too.