I *cannot* use an energy frame if I'm even slightly sus that the other person might mean it literally, like they think there's actually something measurably mystical going on. I feel v allergic
But recently met someone who uses a not-literal energy frame, and it's SO nice 1/
Conversation
Replying to
I do have tons of friends who don't believe in literal energy, but they also don't use it *figuratively* much. This person's primary frame for interacting with the world is energetic, though, and it's fascinating and feels like lots of fodder to think about new things. 2/
3
1
52
Cause I feel like I can actually have cool new kinds of conversations with them? Given the trust of not making literal claims about reality and it being self-owned, there's suddenly a huge world to explore. It's really exciting and makes me wish there was more of this in my life.
2
1
59
A lot of it feels like my body just getting strong, unexpected senses and urges that I don't understand but seem to 'know' more than I do in whatever the interaction is. Or way really good from-the-gut cold reading, or talking about trying to 'open' or 'shut' body locations.
2
1
45
It very much feels like something magical or mystical is going on, like when the body sense that you don't understand turn out to be right it feels like telepathy, and it's really fun and pleasant.
6
2
56
Replying to
In my Burning Man camp, there were people who talked about "energy" and meant it, and there were people who didn't talk about "energy". I was the outlier who talked about "energy" but didn't mean it literally.
4
Replying to
(by a music professor and a filmmaker) has a lot of non-literal discussion of magic, energy, mysticism, dualism, synchronicity, etc. I just heard a live recording of the podcast yesterday that covered Aristotle, Plato, Lovecraft, Evans-Pritchard, Wilkes-Krier, etc.
1
4
Quote Tweet
“Modernness with kindness” - Creating harmony with Phil Ford and @JF_Martel during a live recording of @weirdstudies at @DivIntelligence
0:27
880 views
1
3
Show replies
Replying to
I just think of these as 2 opposing languages to be used in different contexts. One is objective & literal. The other is metaphorical. Like Alan Watts distinction between Gooey and Prickley people.
It's not that the energy "isn't real". It's just a different mode of processing
Replying to
the trouble is the very dualism of the literal and the metaphorical. There is no spoon.
