XLM or X Layer Model [Archive] - Kung Fu Magazine Forums

Hendrik

01-18-2006, 01:13 PM

Hello all

I would like to announce a name changes from the 3 level model or the X level model to X layer model.

Why is this change is important? that is because I want to integrate everything up so that one can see what is happing in term of process of training, platform intertwine....etc. So the concept of one is for all and all is for one really shown. In addition, we want to get out of the computer Programing type of model because IMHO Computer programing type of model cannot cover the essence or the needs of the art such as the conventional computer is a central processing type of model while the intelligent of the Neural Network is every where within its components. That is analogues to the Awareness is everywhere and manifest different components.
So, instead of thinking " there is a central "Mind" which thinks and give command." it is about " every level or layer has its own intelligent and since every lever or layer intertwine, the inteligent of every layer/level intertwine into a wholistic integrated "intelligent". This is important because IMHO, in Chi Sau, it is this type of "intelligent" existed and not a Central "Mind" giving command to the action.

I am using the Neural Network concept model as the platform to fit the X level model. And since Neural Network is using Layers. It fits in beautifully when we change the level to layer. And, I think layer is a more precise word instead of level.

Here is a simple explaination about Neural Network for anyone who is interested in want to know what I am going to talk about.

http://www.cs.stir.ac.uk/~lss/NNIntro/InvSlides.html#what

Architecture:

So, with the NN or Neural Network concept model, or the X layer model, we will have define 4 layers which make up a Typical BP network artchitecture.

the physical platform layer or layer 1, IE: non broken arrow balance platform

the Force Field layer 2 IE: 6 directional force vector , Breathing, Zhen Qi ,

the mental power layer 3 IE: Intention/Attention layer/ Quit the mind.., the

The Awareness Layer 4 IE: surrender to God, Surfing the Nature

TRaining:

and all these layers has to be TRAIN or to give it Inteligent or Smart to perform its job.

This training itself is a big deal because the Layer has to be condition and the Training methodology will influence the characteristics and outcome.

This training concept IMHO is very important because we usualy make an assumption of we just learn the application and that's it we then go applied it.

Well, that doesnt work well. IMHO, the reason is if the Layer to be train is not condition to the state ready to be train and having a training process that can let the Layer soak or and sink in. Then, either nothing will work at all or the efficientcy of the application is very low due to not much tuning or intelligent is given to the Layer.

IE:

Zhan Zhuang of Standing Post has processed of traing the 4 layers depend of different schools or styles. and the conditioning of the Layer before it can be trained is Losing the physical and quiet down the mind. and there has to have ways to do this pre-train conditioning.

Only after the Pre-train conditioning then one can get into say the physcial layer to train the layer to defaut to the Non Broken Arrow Balance Platform, similar to burning a CDRom, burn it in. but it is not quiet thus one needs to keep training until the CDRom is solidly burn in. And that is why one needs to practice the Zhan Zhuang or SLT again and again. To train a certain layer and then another Layer ....

after the train of the first layer, one can continous on the pre-train conditioning of the second layer. then at the training state, one can train the second or force field layer to defaut to the 6 directional force vector awareness...

So, why is one does SLT or for 3 times, that can be three times for training a layer or one time to enhance each layer and training 3 layers in total.

IMHO, the communication breakdown when we discuss about say Keng Geng is that in general we are thinking "if I know the trick we will know how to do it. or you just being secretive to not give me your secret" the fact, IMHO, is that is true but not true.

1, because we dont know about there are layers and layers needs to be condition and train. But assume as soon as one heard about it one can do it. that can get us stuck because we are missing steps or layers.

2, there are process in pre-training conditioning. and there are process in training. one has to dig into deeper layer or hidden layer to pre-train condition it in a certain way and train it in a certain way.

So, if one doesnt go deep enough or doesnt have the "key" to enter into the state. then things would not work properly.
Thus, there are keys which people dont want to give out. However, for general stuffs most of the key are out in the public but in general because of non organized it is scrambled and thus that great problem of things seems not working.

IE: pre-conditoning of snake slide cocoon move of Emei 12 Zhuang training has to reach a certain level of loose-ness. Snake Slide cocoon move training process is different then the TaiJi Reel Silk process.

So, with knowing what is going on within the reality with a solid model. eventhough a model is not and never be the reality. the closer the model to the reality the more we have a better grips or hold on the subject. and the result is hopefully we can have a repeatable process to produce good result.

Just some thoughts to share

Hendrik

01-18-2006, 01:15 PM

So, say we know there are 4 layers of manifestation between input and output.

Say they are:

the physical platform layer or layer 1,
IE: non broken arrow balance platform

the flex flow Force Field layer or layer 2
IE: 6 directional force vector , Breathing, Zhen Qi ,

the mental power layer or layer 3
IE: Intention/Attention layer/ Quit the mind.., the

The Awareness Layer or layer 4
IE: surrender to God, Surfing the Nature

But that is not the end of the story.
it is just a begining.

The following are some applications of XLM

Example 1 ----Decoding and knowing what one get into or needed.

The Daoist has 3 stages of cultivation; namely, cultivate the Jing to transform into Qi, cultivate the Qi to transform into Shen (spirit), cultivate the Shen to transcent into Emptiness.

There is no jumping step every detail has to be known in order to handle the training and get the result. IMHO. So,

we now can decode this 3 stages of training with the X layer Model or XML

for cultivate the jing to transform into Qi must involve layer 1, 2, and some of layer 3 with emphasis on layer 1 and 2.

for cultivation the Qi to transform into shen must included Layer 1, 2, 3, and some of Layer 4 with empasis on layer 2 and 3.

For cultivation the Shen to transcent into Emptiness must included Layer 1, 2, 3, and 4 with emphasis on layer 3 and 4.

So, if one wants to cultivate the Jing to transform into Qi. Then, one knows where and what to look for. instead of suddently walla everything happen while one is keep sleeping.

Example 2 ---- Pattern in dealing with different layers

Since we all are different if we need to train for say breathing which is the second layer component. Some might have to do it started via layer 3 which is settle the mind . Some might have to do it started via layer 1 which is losing the physical. Some might go direct into Layer 2 and train the Breathing itself.

So, say from example 1, cultivate the Jing (essense) to transform into Qi. one might have to start the cultivation following the sequence of layer 1, then layer 2, then Layer 3. Some might have to go direct to layer 3 first due to the mind is absent minded.

The pattern of dealing to train with different layers is a process that is flexible and also based on different school or style.

Say, Yik Kam SLT kuen kuit said

Collect the Yee(intention) union with Shen (spirit) in an equal shoulder stance.

That is actually going to Layer 3 (Yee) and Layer 4 (Shen) with the Support of Layer 1 ( physcial platform). and it is very specific what to do with these Layer. IE Collect the Yee. meaning called all the scatering intention back to NOW. Union with Shen. Meaning, surrender the Will to Dao or Nature. It is similar to Communion with God. One has to let go the Will after the Yee being called back to Now. Equal shoulder Stance. Equal in Chinese is Balance. That is the platform of the stance is a NON Broken Arrow.

So, one knows what to deal with and how to deal with what one is traing at. Incidentally, this pattern is very similar to the pattern of training of Emei 12 zhuang. one can check it out.

Example 3 ---- using the proper layer or layers

This is refer to say breathing training again.

Say lower abdoment training.

Sometimes, we brute force the layer 1, squash and blown our Layer 1 or the physical of the lower abdoment and at the same time stop breathing (layer 2) and thinking with Layer 3 that we are doing a lower abdoment training.

So, in this case, the Layer 3, intention, wants to train the Level 2, breathing into lower abdoment breathing. however, what really happen is a, one stop breathing. b, bruteforce the layer 1, C, thinking the Intention has been execute.

This is a very big problem. Thus, I have heard, from breathing to doing Tan sau...etc. So, the "body" is not doing what the Mind intent. and the Mind "think" the "body" is doing it.

Another case, is even within a layer say layer 1, when one suppose to tense a certain part of body. one tense up a different part of the body. this usually create a sensation of "really put effort" into the training but in fact one is draining one's energy doing something else one have no idea about.

Example 4 --- Using the proper sequencing

Say doing a Tan Sau, how is the layers sequence for exercution?

The Kuen kuit of Yik Kam said,

Eye track the Hand, Hand syncronized with the Heart, Hand issue from the Heart.

We know from this kuen kuit that it involve layer 3 Eye tracking or attention layer 1 hand, Layer 3 heart and layer 1 hand in sync. Layer 3 become the called of the issue.

There is sequencing in Training the Layer or Layers here. It is unfortunately, Hand issues from the heart was generally breaking out as an individual term so one didnt see the totaly view of the training. But even that we know it is Layer 3 become the caller of the issue layer 1 or physical. However, one must Know. The Layer 3 and Layer 1 was condition to track and syncronized before the Issue taking place.

So, this is also and example of pre-training conditioning, Layer training, beside the sequence of Layers execution or training.

SLT IMHO has lots of this stuffs. and one has to be very clear about every layer and layers activation interm of what to look for, attain, cultivate...

So, if GM so and so do SLT or SNT for 1 hours... it is not that one hold one's breath or prolong this or that. it is they are going through every layer and combination of Layers to Train thier Neural Network.

One thing we need to careful about TRain the Neural Network to be inteligent or Aware-full is different then muscular Memory. Aware-full training will be able to self interpolate the solution when needed even it is not train. IE: two condition was trained but something between the two trained condition shows up. so the Aware-full knows what to do. As for memory, with the same situation, only a condition between the two train condition will be selected for solution. due to the memory doesnt have its own inteligent but a Reaction reflex not a Intelligent Response.

With these above XLM, we can see, there is only one SLT or SNT is needed because the Technology is within. and it is not the shape or move but the technology is in the Layers.

It is also not a Programing type of art because in Layer 4, one has to give up or let go one's will. otherwise, one cannot follow the nature.

IE: those who squash and blown up the lower abdoment (layer 1) with Will (layer 3) is not going to understand what is lower abdoment breahing (Layer 2) until one give up the Will (layer 3) to ALLOW the Nature (layer 4) to take over.

Just some thoughts.

BEst to all in your journey.

Hendrik

01-18-2006, 02:35 PM

In summary,

1, X LAYER MODEL

There is a model -- X Layer Model -- which is based on the Neural Network concept to model what one is facing to train while training for an Art such as IE: the SLT or Lower Abdoment Breathing ..or Chi Sau.etc Thus, it can be used as a Tool to direct one to identify what where when and possibilities..etc

2, XLM and its layers.

This XLM has multi-Layers within it. Or an art is an holistic integration of intertwine multi-layers. where each layer has its own intelligent and characteristics.

In the present, 4 layers where identified namely:

the physical platform layer or layer 1,
IE: non broken arrow balance platform

the flex flow Force Field layer or layer 2
IE: 6 directional force vector , Breathing, Zhen Qi ,

the mental power layer or layer 3
IE: Intention/Attention layer/ Quit the mind.., the

The Awareness Layer or layer 4
IE: surrender to God, Surfing the Nature

3, Pre-Train Conditioning and Training

The whole network or each layer needs to be TRAIN or Soak with Awareness or Zap with intelligent in order to make the network alive.

A Pre-Train conditioning is needed before TRAINING can be carry out.

TRAINING might be a Zapping that once Zap the job is done. Or Soaking where repeating for a long perior of time is needed.

Kuen Kuit or key point usually will present the Layer or layers of training, the pre-training conditioning, the Process of training.

4, Training, Memory, Programing definition

Since Neural Network processing concept is different from a conventional computer.

TRaining is about giving the Layer of training Intelligent or Awareness or making it alive. Programing is about giving something a command for execution without making the object to be programmed "alive" or having "inteligent" of its own. Memory is a zap of reflex where there is no intelligent presented but a reflex which select a path to go based on what is being memorized.

IE: an inteligent network will be able to create a solution even it was not train in a certain data points. A program needs to be told what to do if the input is beyond the pre-set data. A memory will only choose either or based on the data programmed.

Different from the Conventional Computer way, XLM doesnt have a central Processing "Mind" or CPU. every layers has its own Inteligent. Layer 3 is the Mind layer however it doesnt really control the rest of the layers but only function for its own function such as setting the intention or paying attention. IE: Layer 3 can intertwine with Layer 1 to influence, however, Layer 3 doesnt have total control or even know about Layer 1 or the physical layer. See, the example on the above post on Lower abdoment mistaken training.

5, Layers sequence and Layer interaction

Since a single layer has its own characteristics however the final outcome is based on the holistic integration of all layers.

The training sequence of the layer can make a different. IE: one might need to calm the mind layer or layer 3 before working at layer 2 the breathing layer. Or one might want to work on the layer 2 the breathing layer before one can reach into work on the layer 3.

There are outcome that is cause by the interaction between two or three different layers instead of a single layer.

just some thoughts.

ghostofwingchun

01-18-2006, 08:07 PM

Mr Hendrik I am sure this is very profound . . . but I do not have the faintest idea what you are talking about . . . lol . . . perhaps this makes sense to you . . . for me things are so much simpler . . . I am thinking that in fighting things can not be complicated . . . but it is over thinking that makes it so . . . wc can not be more complicated than boxing or jujitsu it just will not work . . . at least this is my thought at the moment.

Thanks,

Ghost

Matrix

01-18-2006, 08:13 PM

I am thinking that in fighting things can not be complicated . . . but it is over thinking that makes it so . .Ghost,
I'm beginning to think that we are kindred spirits.
pun intended. :)

anerlich

01-18-2006, 08:25 PM

Mr Hendrik I am sure this is very profound

Incomprehensibility != profundity.

As a colleague of my father said once, "it's stuff like this that gives bu11sh*t a bad name".

Hendrik

01-18-2006, 08:48 PM

Matrix

01-18-2006, 10:01 PM

Great if one just want to drive an automobile and pay someone else to maintain it every month.
Physician, heal thy self. :rolleyes:

YungChun

01-18-2006, 10:17 PM

Matrix

01-18-2006, 10:32 PM

Why someone who claims to have left the ego behind would write a multi-page post on a public forum that is incomprehensible by all but the author completely escapes me. I'm not sure which is worse, the fact that this information is old-news or that it is totally inappropriate for this general audience. In either case, in my opinion, Jim's comments have hit the proverbial nail on the head.

Hendrik

01-18-2006, 11:17 PM

Why someone who claims to have left the ego behind would write a multi-page post on a public forum that is incomprehensible by all but the author completely escapes me.

It's tough enough to get ideas across when all parties read and write English well and use clear and simple terms. This stuff is ASCII encoded masturbation of the highest order IMO.

Communication is never easy.

Sharing about the past attainment/phenomenon with a future expandable technological platform is not everyone's piece of cake. and, certainly better job can be done always.
But, it has to be shared.

And, Sharing is Sharing and solely sharing. Some will like it some will reject it. people always reject whatever new or what they dont expect or what they dont have patients to think about anyway. and everyone is entitle for one's opinion.

So, what to expect? but, allow and embrace whatever opinions and critics. Some critics the contents some attack the person some confuse about what is what, all is a part of communication.

And,
Somehow, some one has to make the first step for communication on what existed. Good or bad that doesnt matter. Sharing is simply sharing. communication has to start somewhere.

if you have a better model. Share it with us. Your contribution will be highly appreciated.

Hendrik

01-18-2006, 11:28 PM

I'm not sure which is worse, the fact that this information is old-news or that it is totally inappropriate for this general audience. In either case, in my opinion, Ray's comments have hit the proverbial nail on the head.

Isnt it Matrix is That was Zen, this is Tao ?

or matrix is the Agents that make decision for the general audience ? :D

Matrix

01-19-2006, 05:01 AM

or matrix is the Agents that make decision for the general audience ? :D
Hendrik,
I will make a recommendation for you. Take the red pill. ;)

You say that communication is never easy, and that some will reject it. In this case it is very true. Mainly because of the obvious intent of the communicator (that's you,btw) to try and BS people with this obtuse model of yours. Communication is much easier when your intent is to really share ideas and concepts, not so when you're trying to showcase your ego.

CFT

01-19-2006, 05:04 AM

In either case, in my opinion, Ray's comments have hit the proverbial nail on the head.Bill, look closer!

YungChun is not YongChun, and if you look at his sig. you will see that he is "Jim" not Ray Van Raamsdonk. Had me confused for a while too.

Matrix

01-19-2006, 05:05 AM

YungChun is not YongChun, and if you look at his sig. you will see that he is "Jim" not Ray Van Raamsdonk. Had me confused for a while too.Hey Chee,
Thanks for the heads up. :)

CFT

01-19-2006, 05:10 AM

No problems Bill. I think I'll hold off creating an alternative "Animatrix" user account.

ghostofwingchun

01-19-2006, 06:50 AM

Mr Hendrik please understand that I am not criticizing you at all . . . I am of opinion that manners are important and that all should be respected . . . your model may truly reflect your thinking . . . and I thank you for sharing it . . . it is just I do not understand it or the terminology . . . and I do not think about wc along those lines . . . there are many things in this technological age that are very complex . . . like modern automobile . . . and there are many subjects so profound I can not even begin to understand . . . like quantum physics or appeal of Dr Phil . . . lol . . . but I am thinking that fighting arts can not be like these . . . or they just will not work . . . fighting arts must be like any other sport . . . fairly simple with straighforward fundamental skill sets . . . they must be like basketball or hockey if we are to really be able to use them . . . and I am thinking that if we have good grasp of wc then should be able to be explain it just as simply as basketball or hockey . . . anything else I am thinking is either way too complicated or is mystification of wc . . . this is my thinking at present.

Thanks,

Ghost

GungFuHillbilly

01-19-2006, 09:18 AM

Hello y’all!

I have read through Hendriks’ XLM model (I don’t know if I am masochistic or have just read way too many philosophy books in my time). There are some important lessons in this thread.

In no particular order…

Hendrik, a good model is only as good as those who can use it AND the quality of the development as a result of the application of the model in reality. [I have taught many engineer’s who wanted to know at what angle their big toe should be in relation to their centerline (yes, I am being sarcastic)…but honestly, there is such thing as over analysis.]

BTW, this is coming from someone who understood your model quite well. I do disagree with some aspects of it however.

Your model is incredibly linear. You do state that anyone can be on any layer at different times (non-linearity), but then why use the term layer? Your model doesn’t explain the horizontal (or what would be referred to as ‘surface’) structure of development or the qualitative structure at each layer. In addition, your model doesn’t explain when, why, or how someone would skip layers (i.e., go from layer 1 to layer 3).

Also where are you seeing the development of ‘timing’ in your model?

It’s not that your model is ‘wrong’…it’s that it is very partial.

The best models are those that are integral, meaning they can explain the phenomena that is happening in the realities of development. IMO, your model fails to capture the flavor of much that is happening in the wing chun world in general at the present time. Whether you agree or disagree with the introduction of different modalities (i.e., MMA, etc.); any model should integrate these into the framework if it wants to be useful.

To follow your analogy…the automobile engineer is not always the best mechanic and vice versa. And neither are usually race car drivers.

People have their own levels of development and students don’t come in with a clean slate. Different people have different beginning attributes. To mold someone to the system instead of using the system to guide someone on the path of self expression does a disservice to the student and the system.

I just feel that in many ways you are trying reinvent the wheel.

You responded to one critique by suggesting that someone put up their model. Well, since you are the one that is proposing this to us…I feel the burden of proof is on you to explain to us why your model explains things that other models don’t (i.e., the chakra model of kundalini yoga or Piaget’s model of development and learning, etc.) or why is your model more integral?

What is your model explaining that we are missing?

Remember, artistic inspiration has always preceded scientific justification.

-GFH

ghostofwingchun

01-19-2006, 10:55 AM

GungFuHillbilly

01-19-2006, 11:41 AM

GungFuHillbilly. . . lol . . . that is great name . . . but I am wondering why anyone needs a model for wc anyway . . . this is unneeded layer of complication I am thinking . . . I do not need model to play basketball or hockey . . . I do not need philosophical system to play basketball or hockey very well . . . not only do I not need them . . . they will only I am thinking make it more difficult to play basketball or hockey by interfering with important stuff . . . the things I do need.

Thanks,

Ghost

Ghost,

You raise some good points. Your right…not everyone needs a model, particular a practitioner, however if you want to teach I feel it is necessary to be able to see a subject from different perspectives and to further ones own understanding/development.

Someone may be able to play basketball or hockey well; however does that make them a great coach? Does being a good player qualify you to understand other player's weaknesses and strengths and what they should work on to be better players?

As a player do you know the strategy of what it takes for a team to win? Or what supplemental training may help a specific student with a particular deficiency?

I am merely suggesting that when someone only has their own myopic view or the 'hey all I know is what works for me' perspective then you are not a very effective teacher. You only know how to guide a limited number of students; namely those students that are like you.

Also having different models could help in working on your own development. It can be useful in creating goals, measuring progress in training, understanding the relationship between different systems, etc.

For example, how would you integrate MMA and Wing Chun? A model could be helpful (even if it is merely a mental model that you never vocalize).

Any good coach/trainer/teacher understands a subject from a number of different perspectives. Perspectives are not necessarily 'right' or 'wrong'; however some perspectives (or models) might be better than others for achieving certain goals.

-GFH

Hendrik

01-19-2006, 12:36 PM

Mr Hendrik please understand that I am not criticizing you at all . . --------

Thank you for sharing your view.

Certainly a good critics is good because it is an excellent feedback of a part of the reality which we all want to know.

it is just I do not understand it or the terminology . . . and I do not think about wc along those lines . . . there are many things in this technological age that are very complex . . . like modern automobile . . . and there are many subjects so profound I can not even begin to understand . . . like quantum physics or appeal of Dr Phil . . . lol . . . ------

Thanks for sharing your perspective. and If I am in your position I might have the same perspective. And, this type of stuff is not every one's piece of cake. Similar to mathematics, some likes it some dont.

but I am thinking that fighting arts can not be like these . . . or they just will not work . . . fighting arts must be like any other sport . . . fairly simple with straighforward fundamental skill sets . . . ------------

The reason for this model stuffs is to serve one purposes.

That is SLT or WCK is known in the ancient time as "EASY to study, But, Hard to master." Thus, not too many people really attaining to the advance level. As I have heard.

Thus, I have heard, The reason behind "EASY to study, But, Hard to master." is that SLT as the name The essence of the microscopic training" it is a compact and "high density" type of art.

So, the purpose of this model stuffs is about to seperate the High Density into different layers. That way, we might be able to check into what is going on within the High Density.

similar to a fine art piece with elegant and depth, IMHO, High Density stuffs sure looks simple, but is it really simple?

We can start to just look at what is very close to oneself.

Say breathing.

Nature Breathing is simple? or Breathing in our own habitual way is simple?

Say, one wants to master the YJKYM, one then has to learn the Nature Lower Abdoment breathing to get the best result.

And, one starts to look into one's breathing. This become very complex when one is trying to observe and understand one's breathing pattern and working on how to shift to the Nature Lower Abdoment breathing.

Now, after say 3 years, when one can do the shift to the Nature Lower abdoment breathing. It is very simple, just an intent. Shift. and the breathing shifted to the Nature Lower abdoment breathing.

So, it is similar to what was said in Zen. Before enligtenment Mountain is Mountain, river is river. While Working to cultivate Enligtenment, Mountain is no longer Mountain, river is no longer river. After attain enligtenment Mountain is just mountain, riever is just river.

Now, there is a process and time one has to go through the Mountain is no longer Mountain period. similar to the simple Breathing training. there is only such thing as one doesnt have to go through the Mountain is no longer mountain period if one is a born Nature genious. However for the general 99% like myself. There is lots of work to be done from totally get dis-integrate not knowing how to breath to getting stress up on how to lift the anus, clamping the butt, squashing the lower abdoment, to stop breathing... all hell break loose and still might not progress as I like it to be.

Another example is similar to washing the Turkey pan after thanks giving holidays. The all grease and dirty comes out from the first soak into a hot water. and if one keep soaking and cleaning. The pan will be spakling clean at the end and that is not similar to dont soak the pan type of cleaning.

On the other hand, one then might said, big deal the Nature Lower Abdoment breathing. what one has is good enough. Sure it is nothing wrong to take this view. However, before one looks into the benifit of Nature Lower Abdoment breathing and see how changing one's own habitual breathing can offer.

they must be like basketball or hockey if we are to really be able to use them . . . and I am thinking that if we have good grasp of wc then should be able to be explain it just as simply as basketball or hockey . . . anything else I am thinking is either way too complicated or is mystification of wc . . . this is my thinking at present.------------

IMHO, we all like things to be simple. and indeed even when I am in the elementry school, there always students who are excellent in math or Sport. and it is so easy simple and easy for them. But, I have to learn and train hard.
So, IMHO, I figure out, it is not that the subject is hard of complex. it is me who is not having the training or doesnt have enough vocab...etc. so I figure out, the only way is keep learning, expanding, and training.

Similarly, what you can do with one simple Tan Sau to neutralized the incoming force I might have to tensing my whole body's muscle to do it. In such a case, I admire your simple effective, and elegant Tan Sau. But, I cant do it without having your precision and optima force vectors manual.

Thanks for your sharing. and I actually welcome your critics or anyone's critics. because it expand my perspective and we can learn from each others lots of things. For sure, you have your reason to see what you see, and to speak up about what you seen is a great thing.

peace

Jim Roselando

01-19-2006, 12:39 PM

Hendrik

01-19-2006, 12:54 PM

Mr Hendrik please understand that I am not criticizing you at all . . --------

Thank you for sharing your view.

Certainly a good critics is good because it is an excellent feedback of a part of the reality which we all want to know.

it is just I do not understand it or the terminology . . . and I do not think about wc along those lines . . . there are many things in this technological age that are very complex . . . like modern automobile . . . and there are many subjects so profound I can not even begin to understand . . . like quantum physics or appeal of Dr Phil . . . lol . . . ------

Thanks for sharing your perspective. and If I am in your position I might have the same perspective. And, this type of stuff is not every one's piece of cake. Similar to mathematics, some likes it some dont.

but I am thinking that fighting arts can not be like these . . . or they just will not work . . . fighting arts must be like any other sport . . . fairly simple with straighforward fundamental skill sets . . . ------------

The reason for this model stuffs is to serve one purposes.

That is SLT or WCK is known in the ancient time as "EASY to study, But, Hard to master." Thus, not too many people really attaining to the advance level. As I have heard.

Thus, I have heard, The reason behind it is that SLT as the name The essence of the microscopic training" it is a "high density" type of art.

So, the purpose of this model stuffs is about to seperate the High Density into different layers. That way, we might be able to check into what is going on within the High Density.

similar to a fine art piece with elegant and depth, IMHO, High Density stuffs sure looks simple, but is it really simple?

We can start to just look at what is very close to oneself.

Say breathing.

Nature Breathing is simple? or Breathing in our own habitual way is simple?

Say, one wants to master the YJKYM, one then has to learn the Nature Lower Abdoment breathing to get the best result.

And, one starts to look into one's breathing. This become very complex when one is trying to observe and understand one's breathing pattern and working on how to shift to the Nature Lower Abdoment breathing.

Now, after say 3 years, when one can do the shift to the Nature Lower abdoment breathing. It is very simple, just an intent. Shift. and the breathing shifted to the Nature Lower abdoment breathing.

So, it is similar to what was said in Zen. Before enligtenment Mountain is Mountain, river is river. While Working to cultivate Enligtenment, Mountain is no longer Mountain, river is no longer river. After attain enligtenment Mountain is just mountain, riever is just river.

Now, there is a process and time one has to go through the Mountain is no longer Mountain period. similar to the simple Breathing training. there is only such thing as one doesnt have to go through the Mountain is no longer mountain period if one is a born Nature genious. However for the general 99% like myself. There is lots of work to be done from totally get dis-integrate not knowing how to breath to getting stress up on how to lift the anus, clamping the butt, squashing the lower abdoment, to stop breathing... all hell break loose and still might not progress as I like it to be.

Another example is similar to washing the Turkey pan after thanks giving holidays. The all grease and dirty comes out from the first soak into a hot water. and if one keep soaking and cleaning. The pan will be spakling clean at the end and that is not similar to dont soak the pan type of cleaning.

On the other hand, one then might said, big deal the Nature Lower Abdoment breathing. what one has is good enough. Sure it is nothing wrong to take this view. However, before one looks into the benifit of Nature Lower Abdoment breathing and see how changing one's own habitual breathing can offer. IMHO, we cant jump to conclusion.

they must be like basketball or hockey if we are to really be able to use them . . . and I am thinking that if we have good grasp of wc then should be able to be explain it just as simply as basketball or hockey . . . anything else I am thinking is either way too complicated or is mystification of wc . . . this is my thinking at present.------------

IMHO, we all like things to be simple. and indeed even when I am in the elementry school, there always students who are excellent in math or Sport. and it is so easy simple and easy for them. But, I have to learn and train hard.
So, IMHO, I figure out, it is not that the subject is hard of complex. it is me who is not having the training or doesnt have enough vocab...etc. so I figure out, the only way is keep learning, expanding, and training.

Thanks for your sharing. and I actually welcome your critics or anyone's critics. because it expand my perspective and we can learn from each others lots of things. For sure, you have your reason to see what you see, and to speak up about what you seen is a great thing.

peace

Hendrik

01-19-2006, 04:28 PM

Hendrik, a good model is only as good as those who can use it AND the quality of the development as a result of the application of the model in reality. ---------

sure. I totally agree with you. you are right.

In additional there is a different between a Good model and a Working model. Thus, as I mention above. If anyone have a better model which is working. Then please share them. For the more working model we have the better off we all are. Since in reality no model is going to fit all.

[I have taught many engineer’s who wanted to know at what angle their big toe should be in relation to their centerline (yes, I am being sarcastic)…but honestly, there is such thing as over analysis.] -------

Agree again about it is not good to do over analysis.

Since Engineer is taugh and train in the engineering way which UNCONDITIONAL repeatability and quality of out come are very important.

Thus, IMHO, asking about the angle of thier big toe if it is because they want to make sure that under all condition they can repeat what they want with a quality outcome that is not over analysis but want to make sure the exercution is proper and adequate.
so, IMHO, that is not over analysis.

Over Analysis IMHO means after the unconditional repeatibility and quality has been achieved, one still proceed with the analysis due to fear or negative thinking or confusion on the subject or lack of confident or ... different reaason.

So, in this case , we know there is notion that looking for Unconditional flawless execution and/or there is Fear or confusion of the subject..etc which lead to over analysis.

We need to seperate these because they are different things.

BTW, this is coming from someone who understood your model quite well. ---------

That might be true and can be the case.
However, until the feedback loop is close here with me on the model. I am really not sure what understood the model quite well means.

I do disagree with some aspects of it however. ------

You sure welcome to disagree. That is the beauty of forum. we all can express our view and discuss.

Your model is incredibly linear. -------

I am afraid I must be not doing the communication job well.

The reason I started this post with Neural Network introduction

http://www.cs.stir.ac.uk/~lss/NNIntro/InvSlides.html

is because I am setting the model platform with Neural Network concept which is as in the above introduction site state

"Where can neural network systems help?

where we can't formulate an algorithmic solution.
where we can get lots of examples of the behaviour we require.
where we need to pick out the structure from existing data. "

It is a power intellectural expandable platform which is capable of doing Non linear and linear.

looking into say Yahoo. one can find the following. and see for yourself what is Neural Networks is used for?

http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=neural+network+nonlinear+control&sp=1&fr2=sp-top&ei=UTF-8&fl=0&fr=slv1-fp&SpellState=n-4033790375_q-SZjTSUznT3wTn1Nzo6AubQABAA%40%40

In addition, in above you said someone is "understood your model quite well." well, that just shown the model is not well understood in evident.

You do state that anyone can be on any layer at different times (non-linearity), but then why use the term layer? -----

The term Layer here is refer to Neural Network Layer not layer such as onion layer. So, that again, if the Neural Network is not understoof one can define the layer as onion layer instead of Layer with INTELIGENT which is by nature can be Both Non-linear and Linear.

Your model doesn’t explain the horizontal (or what would be referred to as ‘surface’) structure of development or the qualitative structure at each layer. ------

You certainly can model your model other way. and please do that and develop one to share with us.

As for the XLM,
Each layer is clearly define above. In the mean time, there are 4 layers and more layers can be add in as needed for expansion and grow.

In addition, your model doesn’t explain when, why, or how someone would skip layers (i.e., go from layer 1 to layer 3). ---------

That is the beauty of the inherit Intelligent model, isnt it?

IE: a Computer is program to execute step 1, then 2 then 3...etc.

But an intelligent spicies doesnt have to follow the step sequence due to it is capable of making wise judgement based on the needs and the condition.

The model didnt explain that because it is not a conventional computing model as you based on.

again, as in the above introduction to Neural network site
http://www.cs.stir.ac.uk/~lss/NNIntro/InvSlides.html

it said

"What is a neural network?

Neural Networks are a different paradigm for computing:
von Neumann machines are based on the processing/memory abstraction of human information processing.

neural networks are based on the parallel architecture of animal brains. "

However, my previous post above does go into detail about Training and the differences between intelligent, programing, and memory isnt it?

Also where are you seeing the development of ‘timing’ in your model? ------

One has to ask a Question what is "timing" before asking above question.

There is Chrono time and different time. and for the XLM, what is timing based on?

The first layer is the physical. The second layer is the flew flow force field, the third layer is the mental. the fourth layer is the Awareness.

Since they are different layers with thier own "timing" embeded in which "timing" is THE "timing" or which timing is not The "timing"?

IE: moving a hand need so many second. Changing an intention need so many millisecond. ....

It’s not that your model is ‘wrong’…it’s that it is very partial. ------

As above, if you looking at Neural Network with conventional computer based view. Then nothing works because one form of computing required a central timing, central processing.... etc and the other one is having intelligent every where doing parallel processing.

So, IMHO, the paradigm has been Shifted from the conventional model of There must be one center processing to the Neuron Network paradigm where there is no center or central processing but every piece of its layers has its own intelligent.

Why is this paradigm shifting is important? That is because IMHO the training of such as Chi Sau is closer to the Neural Network platform with every layer has its own intelligent then a central processing model such as you do this I then do that. type of programing...etc IMHHHO.

The best models are those that are integral, meaning they can explain the phenomena that is happening in the realities of development. --------

I totally agree with you.
As I explain above, Neural Network platform IMHO seem to fit with WCK in the perspective of such as Chi Sau etc.

Please share with us your model. I am sure everyone has a great thing to contribute. So build your model and share with us.

IMO, your model fails to capture the flavor of much that is happening in the wing chun world in general at the present time. Whether you agree or disagree with the introduction of different modalities (i.e., MMA, etc.); any model should integrate these into the framework if it wants to be useful. -------

you could be right in you way of perspective.

People have their own levels of development and students don’t come in with a clean slate. Different people have different beginning attributes. To mold someone to the system instead of using the system to guide someone on the path of self expression does a disservice to the student and the system. -------

You are right. That is why again. IMHO, the Neural Network platform is used. There is no Programing but the training of Intelligent. There is no one must do step 1 then 2 and 3... but a training supporting layers has its own intelligent. and surfing that intelligent in each layer and all layers as a whole is an attemp to modelling the Lao Tzu concept--- Dao's implementation is Nature or using silence/stillness to manage action. instead of program to do rigid steps.

I just feel that in many ways you are trying reinvent the wheel. ------

You might be right.

May be if we reinvent a wheel so that while reinvent it.
we learn what is a wheel is about. that wont be a bad thing right? :D

and since, I am a baby in WCK. So may be similar to a baby, I learn by tearing things a part and put them back together. And sometimes I success sometimes I fail. just a baby trying to learn.

You responded to one critique by suggesting that someone put up their model. ------

IMHO,
One of the reason, say, the Tai Ji group or White Crane of Fujian style is strong over the history of CMA is because they have different models and process and always expand.

So, IMHO, if we want to see WCK as strong as these competators. We want to create as much model and processes as we can. certainly, some model is better some might not be that good. However, there is no model can be everything. and we always can find strong points in the lesser model. So, I do encourage creation of more model.

Hendrik

01-19-2006, 05:00 PM

Well, since you are the one that is proposing this to us…I feel the burden of proof is on you to explain to us why your model explains things that other models don’t (i.e., the chakra model of kundalini yoga or Piaget’s model of development and learning, etc.) or why is your model more integral? -----

It is certainly very valid for you to ask for reason.

as I explain above on the paradigm shifted from the Conventional computing based model to the neural Network model, since different area has different needs.

similarly,
if you look at the kundalini Yoga chakra model with the Chinese medirian's system they are both modeling nature but they dont explain things the same, but both works.

XLM is attemp to map as many core issue needed in training.

There are two major core concept in XLM.

XLM adapting the Neural Network's " training "concept where "training" and "pre-Training conditioning" was emphasis ; where, IMHO, without addressing of the handling of pre-training conditioning and Training.

There are oftern missing steps in cultivation which cause failure.
IMHO, the XLM pre-conditioning and Training is a mapping of Chinese Huo Hou concept.

In Chinese mandarin the Huo Hou means fire condition.
IE: as in Cooking, what type of fire, what is the fire intensity, how long the cooking, what type of cooking.

One can provide recipe, but if the Huo Hou is not provided. Then, the outcome can be very different. IMHO, this is a part of thing we are missing in the modern world when everything goes fast food.

So, XLM provide not only the "Intelligent recipe " with continous holistic integration and also the "fire condition"

In additional, The XLM address the " Intellignet Layer " of Physcial platform, Flex Flow force field Mental Power, and Awareness to model how Awareness makes every layer "intelligent"and how every layer intertwine but with the Awareness. All is for one, one is for one is possibe.

This is not about providing a fix recipe but it is an Intelligent holistic recipe with integrated from the inteligent layers.

Thus, IE: as in cooking,

beside, the XLM provide a knowledge of core elements to aware of the fundamental 4 intelligent layers to make sure there is no missing dominant elements. one doesnt have to go as fast food factory to have to follow x gram of potato y gram of water in rigid but beable to adaptively align as needed while cooking and with a clear direction.

What is your model explaining that we are missing?---------

I have no idea what is your model is.

However, ask youself questions such as. How do you train the YJKYM? what is the core elements are you training? what is the fire condition in every step of the training.

XLM provide the direction of the 4 core inteligent layers needs to be Aware-nized with clarity and the pre-train conditioning and training or Fire condition needs to be handle with care.

How is your model direct you compare with XLM?

Remember, artistic inspiration has always preceded scientific justification. ------

Sure, If I am not wrong, Micrel Angelo said something as " I am not making this statue, I just free the statue from the rock."

And XLM is an attemp to free the statue from the rock. XLM might success might fail that is not important.

What is important is if an Era of free the Statue from the rock with more and more different models and processes will surface. and WCK Bloom.

Peace and lots of love.

Matrix

01-19-2006, 05:04 PM

No problems Bill. I think I'll hold off creating an alternative "Animatrix" user account.
Thanks Chee. I'll do the same with my "CPT" account. :cool:

GungFuHillbilly

01-19-2006, 10:20 PM

Hendrik,

You have made a number of assumptions that you need to address:

You say that a ‘paradigm’ shift is needed away from the ‘conventional computing model.’

First off, I don’t know a single Wing Chun instructor who uses this model in theory or in practice. So who are you talking about? Are you referring to the way that you conceptualize Wing Chun? Please don’t generalize that a paradigm shift is needed when it is obvious that you don’t understand the development that is already built into the system.

How is it that generations of truly great wing chun instructors/practitioners have been successful without this XLM model?

Also where are you seeing the development of ‘timing’ in your model? ------
>One has to ask a Question what is "timing" before asking above question.

Ask any fighter what timing is and he doesn’t need to get into some discussion about quantum fluctuations and different definitions of ‘time’ that have nothing whatever to do with fighting. (But good avoidance of the question)

>IE: moving a hand need so many second. Changing an intention need so many millisecond. ....

This has just proven to me that you do not understand timing from a fighting perspective.
Timing does NOT equal speed the speed of one’s actions or the firing of neurons.

>As above, if you looking at Neural Network with conventional computer based view. Then nothing works because one form of computing required a central timing, central processing…

I in no way was looking at your model from a ‘conventional computer based view.’

I was looking at it from the view of a person who trains in what you are trying to explain. And I am telling you that your model is very partial. Please don’t put up a straw man.

>Why is this paradigm shifting is important?

Again you are assuming that you understand our paradigm. And it is rather arrogant to think that a shift in thinking needs to be made when in the end you are not offering anything that we don’t already know about our art.

>So build your model and share with us.

Why should I build that which is already built? Would you argue then that a pianist truly doesn’t understand music until he has built a piano?

>we learn what is a wheel is about.

Thousands of people are learning about this wheel (without having to build one) and they seem to be able to do this quite well without the XLM model. So again, what does this contribute that is new?

>if we want to see WCK as strong as these competators.

Who said any of us here were in competition with other styles of martial art? Or that the wing chun system was any ‘weaker’ than other systems? I for one am not a Wing Chun ambassador.

>It is certainly very valid for you to ask for reason. as I explain above on the paradigm shifted from the Conventional computing based model to the neural Network model, since different area has different needs.

Again I ask who is using this ‘conventional computing based model’ and who’s paradigm are you talking about? Another question dodged…

>if you look at the kundalini Yoga chakra model with the Chinese medirian's system they are both modeling nature but they dont explain things the same.

You are correct. They are different models. But then again you seem to be looking at these models from a purely corporeal perspective. They go much deeper than this.

Q: What is your model explaining that we are missing?---------
>I have no idea what is your model is.

This is exactly my point. It seems that you haven’t taken the time to find out what others already know. This might save you years of research.

Q: In addition, your model doesn’t explain when, why, or how someone would skip layers (i.e., go from layer 1 to layer 3). ---------

>That is the beauty of the inherit Intelligent model, isnt it? IE: a Computer is program to execute step 1, then 2 then 3...etc. But an intelligent spicies doesnt have to follow the step sequence due to it is capable of making wise judgement based on the needs and the condition. The model didnt explain that because it is not a conventional computing model as you based on.

First off, no I don’t find that beautiful in the least. It merely appears that it is quite arbitrary in that you still don’t have any idea when, why, or how a student would skip layers.

I never suggested that we follow a step sequence. That is your assumption of my ‘paradigm.’

>The model didnt explain that because it is not a conventional computing model as you based on.

Again, you already admitted that you don’t know my model. So then why are you projecting this ‘conventional computing model’ onto my paradigm of wing chun?

I stick by my assessment that you are over analyzing something that needs to be felt and intuited first and foremost.

Dude, it’s like jazz swing. It is near impossible to get a computer to be able to swing like a good jazz player. Swing is timing; and unfortunately it is one of those things that either you get it or you don’t. No amount of thinking about it is going to get you there if you never feel it.

Read the following books, What Computers Still Can't Do: A Critique of Artificial Reason by Hubert L. Dreyfus and Computers Ltd : What They Really Can't Do
by David Harel.

The human being is not a computer and if you want to approach a human activity from the standpoint of a computer…then again I say that your model is incredibly partial. By that I mean it does not explain ‘quality’ and is thus either linear or arbitrary.

You saying that your model is non-linear and pointing us to some website (that has nothing whatever to do with martial art) is far from an explanation as to why we as martial artists would benefit from this ‘paradigm’ of yours.

I think it was Socrates who said… “show me the money!” [oh no, that was Jerry Maguire] ;^)

-GFH

ghostofwingchun

01-20-2006, 06:38 AM

Ghost,

You raise some good points. Your right…not everyone needs a model, particular a practitioner, however if you want to teach I feel it is necessary to be able to see a subject from different perspectives and to further ones own understanding/development.

Someone may be able to play basketball or hockey well; however does that make them a great coach? Does being a good player qualify you to understand other player's weaknesses and strengths and what they should work on to be better players?

As a player do you know the strategy of what it takes for a team to win? Or what supplemental training may help a specific student with a particular deficiency?

I am merely suggesting that when someone only has their own myopic view or the 'hey all I know is what works for me' perspective then you are not a very effective teacher. You only know how to guide a limited number of students; namely those students that are like you.

Also having different models could help in working on your own development. It can be useful in creating goals, measuring progress in training, understanding the relationship between different systems, etc.

For example, how would you integrate MMA and Wing Chun? A model could be helpful (even if it is merely a mental model that you never vocalize).

Any good coach/trainer/teacher understands a subject from a number of different perspectives. Perspectives are not necessarily 'right' or 'wrong'; however some perspectives (or models) might be better than others for achieving certain goals.

-GFH

GungFuHillbilly thank you for views . . . perhaps I am confused . . . what exactly is your definition of model . . . is it perspective or mental image? . . . and what is being modeled . . . are we talking about model for application or model for training or model for something else . . . I suspect that if you went up to good basketball player or good hockey player or good boxer and asked them what their model was they would not understand what you were talking about . . . because I do not think they think about their sports or training in this manner . . . it is my view based on my experience and understanding of science of motor learning that we can not draw these things out on paper first . . . like how to integrate MMA and wc . . . and then implement . . . because these things are not static and fixed but are very dynamic organic and based on individual variation in abilities . . . there are many great coaches in every sport but I do not think they have variety of models to choose from . . . I do not think they have model at all . . . my concern is that I am wondering if model is what actually holds us back . . . because with model we get stuck trying to make reality fit model rather than simply deal with reality . . . do you see what I mean?

Thanks,

Ghost

ghostofwingchun

01-20-2006, 07:00 AM

Hello,

but I am wondering why anyone needs a model for wc anyway

Then you should discard SLT/CK/BJ etc!

I do not need model to play basketball or hockey

Try playing any of those sports without going thru the basic training needed to prepare one to play sports.

As martial artists, we cultivate/develop our body to become fighters. In sports, we cultivate/develop our bodies to play sports. No different. Take out the cultivation and basics of any sport or art or cooking class (whatever) and its not likely you will develop to be good at anything!

Without progression we cannot go far. It ends up like a needle in a hay stack and that tends to leave the genetically gifted to only progress. The process HS listed is no different from what any soft/internal Rou style follows.

Any good coach/trainer/teacher understands a subject from a number of different perspectives. Perspectives are not necessarily 'right' or 'wrong'; however some perspectives (or models) might be better than others for achieving certain goals.

Agreed!

Regards,

Mr Roselando thank you for your view as well! I am thinking certainly that proficiency with fundamentals is necessary to be skilled in any activity . . . but I do not see fundamentals as model . . . these are the basic skills necessary to play game whatever game is . . . progression is not model but is order of these skills . . . it is my understanding that this is what sets convey order of skills . . . all these things come from understanding game which comes from playing game . . . it is easy thing for good basketball player to list fundamentals and their order . . . but they do not have model or need model . . . does basketball player or coach need different perspectives about basketball to develop . . . different perspectives about what . . . I do not understand term cultivation perhaps you will explain it to me.

Thanks,

Ghost

Jim Roselando

01-20-2006, 08:19 AM

Hello Ghost,

From reading your post it seems that you regard basics as just body postitions or techniques that need come out only via the hands on.

Cultivation is the process of which we take our bodies thru at the same time all the other training (things you mentioned) and stuff is going on. Cultivation is the development that is going on inside! The tendons, sinews, joints, etc.. Its also the softening of the body and breath that is going on. This harmonizes the in and out. Anyone who lifts weights or does Yoga or anything morfs the body little by little year after year. Wing Chun is no different. So, without a progression for the basics body, medium developed body & developed body, etc then it limits the arts potential of reproduction of Chuk Geng/Rou Jing.

Even Wang Xiang Zhai, who was a ferocious fighter, said:

I need on average 9 years to "fully" train the lower/middle/upper back to its full potentail.

In any art or sport there is:

Cultivation: We build/strengthen our bodies/basics/etc.. X1

Manifestation: We do something with what we built (the dynamic equilibrium/6d body) and continue to Cultivate at the same time. X2

Interaction/Free Usage:Sparring and Natural expression of the below. X3

Of course each stage can have numerous things but that pretty much sums it up for anything we learn. So, whats being discussed is not "techniques" related but internal cultivation process towards Rou art that derives its "basics" on:

Recieve/Escort & Use stillness etc..

Regards,

Mr Roselando thank you for your view as well! I am thinking certainly that proficiency with fundamentals is necessary to be skilled in any activity . . . but I do not see fundamentals as model . . . these are the basic skills necessary to play game whatever game is . . . progression is not model but is order of these skills . . . it is my understanding that this is what sets convey order of skills . . . all these things come from understanding game which comes from playing game . . . it is easy thing for good basketball player to list fundamentals and their order . . . but they do not have model or need model . . . does basketball player or coach need different perspectives about basketball to develop . . . different perspectives about what . . . I do not understand term cultivation perhaps you will explain it to me.

01-20-2006, 08:30 AM

I do not think they have model at all . . . my concern is that I am wondering if model is what actually holds us back . . . because with model we get stuck trying to make reality fit model rather than simply deal with reality . . . do you see what I mean?

Just because someone doesn't use the term model, doesn't mean they don't have one. Except when acting on pure instinct, it can be argued that humans are using models all the time. If they have a mental construct about what they are doing, and even if they don't consciously "think" or analyze for themselves but apply some type of a pattern (e.g. a training pattern or regimen), then they have or apply some form of a model.

Moreover, just because one has a model (a rose by any other name), that also doesn't mean they they are limited to that one model. Most of us evolve in how we analyze a thing or in how we apply one or more models all the time.

"All models are wrong; some models are useful." - George Box (One of my favorite underappreciated quotes.)

All discussions on this forum are also models. And therefore also wrong. :D

My paltry thinking anyways. And obviously tangential to Hendrik's contribution or the critique of it currently in progress. ;)

Regards,
- kj

GungFuHillbilly

01-20-2006, 08:59 AM

Ghost,

Thank you for your post. You must understand that my comments above were directed to Hendrik and the majority of my questions were rhetorical in nature.

None the less, I feel you have brought some excellent points.

what exactly is your definition of model . . . is it perspective or mental image? . . .

For the sake of brevity and in the most general of terms a model is a structural design/plan of a theory and/or practice of a thing in whole and/or in part.

and what is being modeled . . . are we talking about model for application or model for training or model for something else . . .

There can be models for both or either.

I suspect that if you went up to good basketball player or good hockey player or good boxer and asked them what their model was them what their model was they would not understand what you were talking about . . . because I do not think they think about their sports or training in this manner . . .

Very good point. But then again that’s why they have coaches. (and why BTW the UCLA basketball coach is paid more than any other public official in the state of California! By your reasoning he doesn’t need to be there)

it is my view based on my experience and understanding of science of motor learning that we can not draw these things out on paper first . . .

Who said a model had to be drawn on paper? Einstein is one example, he thought for a long time about the theory of relativity before he put anything on paper.

like how to integrate MMA and wc . . . and then implement . . . because these things are not static and fixed but are very dynamic organic and based on individual variation in abilities . . .

Please read my post again. My point was that Hendriks’ model does not explain any of this. So my question to him was why should we be persuaded to use it at all? I never once said that a theory/model should be static. In addition my specific critique of Hendrik’s model is that it is reductionistic and simplistic.

There are many great coaches in every sport but I do not think they have variety of models to choose from . . . I do not think they have model at all . . .

This is where I must strongly disagree. Do you think that great coaches don’t put together training plans? Workout routines? Strategy guides? What do they do, just show up and say, “ok boys, play.”

Can you honestly tell me that you believe that an NFL football coach is flying blind with no idea of where he is going; merely making stuff up as he goes along? Or that with millions of dollars on the line top pro boxers or NBA basketball players trust their careers to dumb luck and chance?

(If you believe all of that then I have a bridge I’d like to sell ya.)

Isn’t it more likely that these coaches are highly organized, highy scientific in their planning and coordination of theory and application? And that they use this knowledge (dare I say models;) ) to help train and guide their athletes?

my concern is that I am wondering if model is what actually holds us back . . . because with model we get stuck trying to make reality fit model rather than simply deal with reality . . . do you see what I mean?

I am guessing that you are using a guite narrow definition of “model.” Here are a few more examples of models:

Sui Lim Tau, Chum Kiu, Mok Yang Jong, Bue Gee, Chi Sau, Luk dim bune gwan, Bot Jaam Do, attribute training, etc.

This list is by no means inclusive, just a few examples. So let me ask you…do you think that these models are holding us back? In other words how would you teach someone wing chun? Would you suggest that we do away with forms altogether? That a student should never do forms, drill, spar, or practice in any organized way?

If you don’t have some kind of model (either explicit or implicit) then you are just haphazardly taking the student through an unorganized mess of motions that they will probably never understand.

Or do you feel, as I do, that models can be good if we understand that they are merely tools that we can use to understand our art, our deficiencies, our progress, our students’ needs, the relationship of our art to other arts, etc…

-GFH

GungFuHillbilly

01-20-2006, 09:14 AM

Just because someone doesn't use the term model, doesn't mean they don't have one.

Most of us evolve in how we analyze a thing or in how we apply one or more models all the time.

"All models are wrong; some models are useful." - George Box (One of my favorite underappreciated quotes.)

All discussions on this forum are also models. And therefore also wrong. :D

My paltry thinking anyways. And obviously tangential to Hendrik's contribution or the critique of it currently in progress. ;)

Regards,
- kj

KJ,

Brilliant post! I haven't progressed as far as you have with my 'model' of language.:o

That is..."say more with less." :D

-GFH

(dang, still too many notes...:( sorry Mozart)

Mr Punch

01-20-2006, 09:41 AM

jeeping ****!

must...

punch...

some....

thing...!

:D

thanks hendrik and others for your time.

wish i had time to read this kind of malarkey!... and maybe i'll be wishing i had the brain too!

Jim Roselando

01-20-2006, 09:59 AM

Hello Matt,

It says you are in Tokyo right?

Why not visit Kenichi Sawei's senior students over there?

I believe Gyoto (sp?) teaches and writes about the art they teach. He also visits and co-wrote a book on Wang's art with Yao Zong Xun's son. They also have Open Kumite yearly for test of skill. Their art would be under the name of Tai Ki Ken which is Sawei's understanding of Wang's Yi Chuan. Sawei, a Japanese Judo champion was his student for 10 years.

Maybe he can explain or it let you feel what his arts about. Then, tell us what Malarkey feels like from experience!

:D

Regards,

ghostofwingchun

01-20-2006, 11:27 AM

ghostofwingchun

01-20-2006, 11:45 AM

Just because someone doesn't use the term model, doesn't mean they don't have one. Except when acting on pure instinct, it can be argued that humans are using models all the time. If they have a mental construct about what they are doing, and even if they don't consciously "think" or analyze for themselves but apply some type of a pattern (e.g. a training pattern or regimen), then they have or apply some form of a model.

Moreover, just because one has a model (a rose by any other name), that also doesn't mean they they are limited to that one model. Most of us evolve in how we analyze a thing or in how we apply one or more models all the time.

"All models are wrong; some models are useful." - George Box (One of my favorite underappreciated quotes.)

All discussions on this forum are also models. And therefore also wrong. :D

My paltry thinking anyways. And obviously tangential to Hendrik's contribution or the critique of it currently in progress. ;)

Regards,
- kj

KJ thank you so much for explaining these things for me . . . I can understand that some people can not have term model but still have model . . . but I am still thinking that some can not have term and not have model . . . lol . . . I also understand that model can change or evolve . . . this is good you point this out . . . I guess what I am having trouble with is two things . . . first is definition of model . . . I do not for instance think discussion whether on forum or in person is model . . . all things are not models . . . if so then term is meaningless . . . lol . . . second I am thinking that model is intellectual representation of reality . . . so I do not see need for model in physical activity or sport I am thinking that person in such case needs skills . . . skill is not based on model or intellectual process . . . skill comes from body from doing . . . this is why I do not think basketball players or hockey players or other sport participants have models . . . there is only activity and skills . . . . they have reality of actually playing game . . . they do not need to represent it . . . perhaps you or some one can give me example of what is model in boxing and what is being modeled how did it develop and so forth so that I get better idea of whole model notion.

Thanks,

Ghost

Jim Roselando

01-20-2006, 01:19 PM

Hendrik

01-20-2006, 03:59 PM

Hi everyone,

Thank you for sharing your ideas. Great keep discuss.

Instead of replying every post, I would to make the following general reply:

1, lets examine ourself

Which of the following concept/model/paradigm do we practice in our daily / Believing/operate/ living/Thinking/ Traiing :

A, Mind/Will/Thought/Mental is the master, the rest of the body is the subordinate. Or the mind is the master the rest is servants or accesory

This is similar to the conventional computer which has a Central Processing Unit and the rest is the peripherar device.

or

B, Mind/Will/Thought/Mental and the rest of the body is having Equal positions.or mind and body are in equal position and each of them has thier own wisdom.

This is similar to the Neural Network.

Again, as the http://www.cs.stir.ac.uk/~lss/NNIntro/InvSlides.html#what
defined.

What is a neural network?

Neural Networks are a different paradigm for computing:

A, von Neumann machines are based on the processing/memory abstraction of human information processing.

B, neural networks are based on the parallel architecture of animal brains.

A or B is a paradigm or model whether one consciously or unconsciously following it.

2, XLM is a paradigm shift for those who practice/Living/Thinking/Training with A.

In the concept of XLM embeded the concept of EVERY Layer has its own intelligent. There is NO central processing unit. There is NO system clock. It is an Asynchronous.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asynchronous_circuit.

It is parallel architecture processing type.

And, the A is doing PROGRAMING or giving fix Command for exercution. The B or XLM is doing TRAINING or Aware-nized to grow the intelligent so that the intelligent can manage its own task.

Hope this is clear why it is a different Paradigm and why is it a paradigm shift when one shifter from A to B.

and because the shift the outcome or result changes.

IE: Mental power is no longer the master. Mental power is just an intelligent layer or layer 3 which is having an equal position/weight with Layer 1. They intertwine and support each others. There is no master slave relationship.

Similarly, Layer 4 is another equal layer which is the Awareness Layer. This Layer is present even when one is a sleep. Layer 3 fade off but Layer 4 always there.
Because of the existance of Layer 4 or Aware of the Present of the Layer 4. another Paradigm shift can occur. and That is one can surrender or let go the Will but let the Awareness take over.

Layer 3 dealing with EGO. Layer 4 dealing with Awareness or Peace of Mind. The layer 3 type of conscious activity in general is: compertition, being the best, being the superior, beating others, MY way...etc. it is based on EGO centric. the layer 4 type of conscious activity in general is: Forgive, Let Go, Peace, Embrace, Surrender, Allow...etc.

Furthermore, interm of associate with the Yoga chakra system: Layer 3 can associate with first 3 chakra living before the 4th Chakra is "open". Layer 4 can associate with atleast the first 4 Chakra living where the 4th Chakra has been "open".

Layer 4 is the Layer activated for the State:
In Yee Chuan, Dao Mimic Nature,
In WCK, Comes recieve, Goes send back, let go and proceed, using Silence/Stillness to manage action.
In TaiJi, Surrender oneself and following others.

XLM specifically seperate this Layer out to address the different between Mental Power and Awareness where in general not clearly define and thus have no way to cultivate it.
IE: how to train the Yee and what is the different between Yee and Shen? Yee is layer 3 stuffs. Shen is layer 4 stuffs. IMHO.

Again, XLM is not a program. If one think of XLM with the View of A above,, then one will miss the meaning of XLM.

Peace

01-20-2006, 04:22 PM

I guess what I am having trouble with is two things . . . first is definition of model

There are all kinds of models. There are mathematical models, process models, personality models, behavioral models, photographic models, scale models, descriptive models, spiritual models, linguistic models, rhetorical models, sports models, learning models, fighting models, training models, developmental models, mental models, ad infinitum. My definition of a model, in the broadest sense, is something that resembles or characterizes something else.

What is your definition of a model?

. . . I do not for instance think discussion whether on forum or in person is model . . .

Do the items we discuss resemble or characterize, at least in part, our thoughts? When we describe something, is that description not intended to bring to mind for the reader a mental representation of the thing?

all things are not models . . . if so then term is meaningless

I wouldn't say so. However, I grant that being specific about the type of model in question, no less its intended purpose, can be useful. I am intentionally applying a broad definition of model. You may, on the other hand, be thinking of a more specific type of model, or models.

. . . lol . . . second I am thinking that model is intellectual representation of reality . . .

... and forum discussions do not qualify? :confused:

so I do not see need for model in physical activity or sport I am thinking that person in such case needs skills . . . skill is not based on model or intellectual process . . . skill comes from body from doing . .

I agree that body skills come from doing.

Still, how does one know how to go about the doing, or what to include in the doing, or what the doing is? I propose again that - unless one is acting strictly on instinct with no forethought, no planning, no patterning, no strategy - that one has adopted or created some type of model for the doing or practice, however simplistic that model may be.

this is why I do not think basketball players or hockey players or other sport participants have models . . .

Do they not have training models? Do they not have fitness models? Do they not have patterned exercises, or game plans?

there is only activity and skills . . . . they have reality of actually playing game . . .

This, IMHO, is getting close to the crux. What we think, what we perceive, what we calculate, what we draw, what we describe, what we anticipate, what we "know," etc. etc. etc. vs. the reality of a thing (presumably, the reality of the thing being modeled). This is where is it helpful to bear in mind that "All models are wrong; some models are useful." :)

they do not need to represent it . . .

Hmmm ... do they not codify practice or characteristics of their game or how to play it? Do they not draw pictures of it, generate diagrams or patterns for what to do in practice or how to coordinate during a game? Don't they write about it, take pictures, make videos, movies, or talk about it?

perhaps you or some one can give me example of what is model in boxing and what is being modeled how did it develop and so forth so that I get better idea of whole model notion.

By way of example, previous boxers serve as models for what boxers should be, what they should do, or how they should do it. Boxing training methods serve as models for boxers or would-be boxers to follow in training. Specific boxing strategies serve as models for what do do while boxing. Encyclopedias and text descriptions are models for what the art of boxing actually is (the text descriptions - ideas, words, ink - themselves are not boxing). These are just some off-the-cuff examples; I'm sure others could offer more and better. Some models will be more comprehensive, accurate, useful, precise, pleasant, objective, complex, paradoxical, etc. than others.

Thanks,

Thanks back; it's fun. :) Though it does seem an awful lot of work, just for purposes of supporting my initial contention, LOL.

Regards,
- kj

01-20-2006, 04:28 PM

That is..."say more with less." :D

My goal too. :o Trouble is, then only those who get it, get it. There's always a dilemma. :(

Regards,
- kj

Mr Punch

01-20-2006, 05:12 PM

Thanks for the idea Jim(m?!)...

I think the Tai Ki Ken dojo is a twenty five minute bike ride from my house. There's no shortage of good MA over here, but what there is a shortage of unfortunately is TIME! Besides which, I still have plenty to work on with my wing chun and its models!

I did have a chance to train with a very skilled internal koryu aikijutsuka whose internal model fit very nicely with the hsingyi he had also trained in and helped me understand some things about my wing chun immensely... but that's another story, not to derail Hendrik's thread.

Hendrik: have you written any books? The longer I spend in front of this **** machine, the worse my posture gets!

GungFuHillbilly

01-20-2006, 07:27 PM

Hello y’all,

I am reminded of an old saying that I used to have hanging by my desk…it went like this:

“The inhabitants of annealed silicates should not indulge in the promiscuous promulgation of geological fragments.” huh?:confused:

It translates as ‘people that live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.’

Why did I choose to represent it in the most obtuse, overly complicated way I could? It was to remind everyone I worked with of two things:

1 – Always keep in mind your audience.
and
2 – If you can’t say it in simple language then you are probably trying to “dress your theory.” (meaning the theory probably doesn’t hold water, but in your attempt to legitimize it you try and sound impenetrably intelligent while making things much more difficult than they have to be). Your audience then begins to believe that becuase it is presented in such 'intelligent' garb that there must really be something to it.

Which brings me to this thread…I have attempted to ask reasonable questions for Hendrik to address regarding the model that he is promoting here. However, it’s now become blatantly obvious to me that Hendrik has no interest in dialogue but merely monologue.

His arguments are circular and he has still yet to explain why his ‘model’ should be important to us. He would rather create imaginary straw men to argue against and tell us to ‘ignore the man behind the curtain.’

In other words none of us have proposed ‘paradigm A’!!! :mad: However he has erected this as the meta-narrative that he must now save us from. :confused: Dude, many of us have joined the post-modern world a while back where were you? And I would argue that there are those here that are coming from a post-post-modern perspective.

Who here has said ‘the mind is the master’??? :confused: It appears to me that he has projected a paradigm onto all of us without once asking us what we think before putting words in our mouths!

I see this as not only mental masturbation but comletely narcissistic.

So Mr. Hendrik, I wish you well with your computer models and your overly complicated theories. Good luck. :)

-GFH

Hendrik

01-20-2006, 08:37 PM

Thank you.

Peace and Lots of Love!

Hello y’all,

I am reminded of an old saying that I used to have hanging by my desk…it went like this:

“The inhabitants of annealed silicates should not indulge in the promiscuous promulgation of geological fragments.” huh?:confused:

It translates as ‘people that live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.’

Why did I choose to represent it in the most obtuse, overly complicated way I could? It was to remind everyone I worked with of two things:

1 – Always keep in mind your audience.
and
2 – If you can’t say it in simple language then you are probably trying to “dress your theory.” (meaning the theory probably doesn’t hold water, but in your attempt to legitimize it you try and sound impenetrably intelligent while making things much more difficult than they have to be). Your audience then begins to believe that becuase it is presented in such 'intelligent' garb that there must really be something to it.

Which brings me to this thread…I have attempted to ask reasonable questions for Hendrik to address regarding the model that he is promoting here. However, it’s now become blatantly obvious to me that Hendrik has no interest in dialogue but merely monologue.

His arguments are circular and he has still yet to explain why his ‘model’ should be important to us. He would rather create imaginary straw men to argue against and tell us to ‘ignore the man behind the curtain.’

In other words none of us have proposed ‘paradigm A’!!! :mad: However he has erected this as the meta-narrative that he must now save us from. :confused: Dude, many of us have joined the post-modern world a while back where were you? And I would argue that there are those here that are coming from a post-post-modern perspective.

Who here has said ‘the mind is the master’??? :confused: It appears to me that he has projected a paradigm onto all of us without once asking us what we think before putting words in our mouths!

I see this as not only mental masturbation but comletely narcissistic.

So Mr. Hendrik, I wish you well with your computer models and your overly complicated theories. Good luck. :)

-GFH

Hendrik

01-20-2006, 09:39 PM

Hendrik: have you written any books?

no plan and my idea is not fix. So things will easily out of date.

ghostofwingchun

01-21-2006, 09:29 AM

Ghost,

Mr Roselando do these Yi Chuan practitioners who have Open Kumite enter Pride or other NHB tournaments . . . if so can you provide some names.

Sorry Ghost but that is an old line that doesn't hold much value and has been debated numerous times. Comparing professional athletes that train hours daily versus regular Joe Smoe people is worthless. This requires a side by side lay out of all the training for fair comparison. Hours of daily training, Diet, Road Work, Cardio, Matt Time, Weight Lifting, Coaching, Sparring etc.. A profession athlete needs hours daily to train for pro fighting.

Can you name all the modern Wing Chun fighters/experts in the Pride or NHB?

Can you name one Open Fight Tourny held yearly from the WC camp that allows others to enter?

Its ok to appreciate the usage of an art for value but there are lots of things to consider when making fair comparison. Watch Spike TV show about UFC and how they train the future fighters. These guys train in a gym numerous hours daily under supervised coaches to prep for fighting. Trade place with one of them and make sure you fit in these little things in life that always get in the way of fun like Work, Family, etc..

Hey Ghost! I would prefer to talk to a person versus a cyber name. Whats your name?

Just my opinion!

Peace,

Mr Roselando thank you for your reply . . . I am sorry . . . I thought you bring up Yi Chaun fighters to make point about how certain form of training produces good fighters . . . you suggested to some one that they should go to see their Open Kumite as proof of their skills . . . trouble with these open kumite is that some times good people not seek them out so open kumite is really in house tourney . . . so I ask if they seek good fighters out likke NHB . . . do you see what I mean? I did not know these Yi Chaun people were amatuer fighters . . . and I understand that amatuer is not the same level as pro . . . so have they competed in any amatuer NHB events . . . like Orr people for instance . . . some wc people have competed and lost at Pride and UFC though . . . so do Yi Chuan people not have time for amatuer level of training either . . . lol . . . sorry just kidding . . . I am only confounded that you bring up Yi Chaun people as proof of effectiveness of certain training and then say can not compare to others since they not train as hard . . . lol . . . well I am thinking that group with poor or low level training is not good one to use as example . . . lol! You ask me to provide proof of wc . . . well I am not one making claim you are . . . but there have been some wc people that have fought and won in NHB fights . . . some have posted results here I think . . . they are not pros though. I agree with you one hundred percent that pro training is hard and most people do not do it . . . and I am not trying to contradict you . . . but when you use example as proof it is only common sense to question and examine that example . . . to see if it really proves what you claim . . . do you see? You ask for my name . . . as I have said before . . . I do not give out personal information over internet . . . for many reasons . . . including that there are crazy people out there . . . not saying you are one . . . lol . . . but some may be listening . . . collegue has great trouble because of one . . . and besides my name has nothing to do with validity of my views or questions . . . these things should stand on own . . . I stand on the substance of discussion . . . and nothing else.

Thanks,

Ghost

Matrix

01-21-2006, 10:23 AM

Matrix

01-21-2006, 10:31 AM

His arguments are circular and he has still yet to explain why his ‘model’ should be important to us. He would rather create imaginary straw men to argue against and tell us to ‘ignore the man behind the curtain.’
GFH,
Thank you for your valiant attempt to try and bring some sense to this discussion. Most of us have been through this same circular dialogue with Hendrik in the past, and I for one see this as just another attempt by him to try and "enlighten" us to his view of the world.

I don't know if you're really a HillBilly (and it doesn't really matter) but in my opinion your are definitely a Gung Fu man. :)

Thanks again for your efforts.

Peace,

Hendrik

01-21-2006, 11:40 AM

Just as the Ego distances us from self-actualization.

We do not need to add layers, but rather peel them away to see the true core of what we are studying. -----

You might be right, May be the truth is to peel them away.

However,
May be there is nothing to peel away because it is all a Part of Now, Peace, and Harmony in holistic.

And recognized that there are layers and layers and thier nature be able to Allow the whole to be nature, in peace, and harmony.

It is not about learning or get rid off, it is about learning to unlearn.

As heallers knows, healing is about recognized and give the body, emotional, mental, spiritual a chance to heal itself. feed the body nuitrition food and give it good rest, Thinking happy thoughts, being in environment which is relax and rejunial (sp?), and surrender one to God or Buddha nature or Dao...

Thus, one needs to know the four "layers" --- the body, emotional, mental, spiritual for healling. Or in the other words: the Physical, flexflow force field, mental power, Awareness.

Who knows? XLM might be A NADA. XLM might be has some merit. That, I surrender to the Nature.

BTW: EGo is associate with layer 3. and one doesnt get rid of it because EGO by itself is an attribute needed. But when one takes this attribute as the Master. That is where the problem arise. Thus I have heard.

Matrix

01-21-2006, 11:59 AM

However,
May be there is nothing to peel away because it is all a Part of Now, Peace, and Harmony in holistic..Hendrik,
Yes, I agree. IF you can attain "Part of Now, Peace, and Harmony" then you have reached a higher level of understanding. I would say in this case, that less (layers) is in fact more. More layers makes things less clear, less pure. The goal, IMO, is to make things as simple as possible, but not simpler. The EGO can be a huge barrier to achieving this goal.

TW: EGo is associate with layer 3. and one doesnt get rid of it because EGO by itself is an attribute needed. But when one takes this attribute as the Master. That is where the problem arise. Thus I have heard.Why is Ego needed? And if it is, I'm thinking that it needs to be subdued, just as muscle strength must be subdued on the physical side in order to achieve pure power. Just a thought.

Peace,

ghostofwingchun

01-21-2006, 12:05 PM

Right on kJ. This is a critical observation. In fact, I would say that Hendrik's model serves as an attempt to bring WC to a level of abstraction that actually distances us from the true essence of what we are trying to understand. It adds an "X" layer that does not serve to increase understanding but in fact would further seperate us from it. Just as the Ego distances us from self-actualization. We do not need to add layers, but rather peel them away to see the true core of what we are studying.

Just an attempt to innovative. :rolleyes:

Matrix you have succinctly put what I have been trying to say . . . well done . . . this is what I see as model problem . . . but not just with Mr Hendrik's model . . . but in some sense all models . . . though perhaps some are worse than others . . . lol . . . they are abstraction of what is essentially physical domain . . . and going about it backwards . . . we can abstract about surfing too . . . but it is learned skill that comes from the doing not from abstracting about how it should be done . . . when person gets out in ocean on surfboard there is no room for abstraction . . . as beginner or expert . . . the body takes over and learns what it needs to do . . . for me wc is not about understanding then doing . . . that is backwards . . . but about the doing with understanding developing from that . . . at least this has been my experience in every sport or martial art I have ever been involved with . . . of course I can be wrong . . . and this just applies to me . . . but it seems to be consistent with most athletes I have met. In the end of course I think it comes down to individual goal . . . and individual interest . . . I offer my thoughts only as my perspective . . . I find Mr Hendrik's model very interesting even though I do not fully understand it . . . I find other views of wc very interesting too even if I do not abide by them . . . I am thankful Mr Hendrik shares model . . . as it gives me pause to think and consider these things . . . and it shows that he is thinking also . . . so it is a good thing to discuss these things and critique these things . . . as this often helps us to clarify our own thoughts and reconsider our own thoughts . . . but it is not some thing to get upset over . . . or make personal attacks over . . . or the like . . . if we are comfortable and secure in what we do then if others do some thing different or believe some thing different we will not see it as threat . . . this is my thinking at least.

Thanks,

Ghost

Matrix

01-21-2006, 12:20 PM

this is what I see as model problem . . . but not just with Mr Hendrik's model . . . but in some sense all models .
Ghost,
Yes, I would say that many models can make things in fact more complicated. They are helpful in very complex systems, since they use abstraction to simplify for better understanding of the inherent complexity.
In our case, WC is a simple system that we can make more complex by adding complex models and layers. However, as KJ quite correctly pointed out, we already use basic models all the time. These models differ, IMO, from something like the proposed XLM model which is artificially adding complexity that is counterproductive to our goal.

Hendrik

01-21-2006, 07:17 PM

I would say in this case, that less (layers) is in fact more. More layers makes things less clear, less pure. The goal, IMO, is to make things as simple as possible, but not simpler.----- ----

That is a great idea.

However,

what if the Layers are not something one formulate with deduction of mind speculation?

The Buddha has the 5 skandhas.

http://villa.lakes.com/cdpatton/Dharma/Basics/5-skandhas.html
http://www.theosophy-nw.org/theosnw/world/asia/as-heart.htm#text
http://online.sfsu.edu/%7Erone/Buddhism/Shurangama/ps.ss.02.v8.020526.screen.pdf

The Indian has 7 Chakras.

Thus, I have heard the
The Indian's 7chakras can map into the Buddhist 5 Skandhas model.

IMHO, The most the XLM can only map into 4 of the 5 skandhas.
Thus, XLM still is a simplified introductory model to describe what is exist. compared with the 5 skandhas. There are certain Layers in reality that the XLM is still far from reach. The most the XLM can do is an introductory model compare with the 5 skandhas.

The EGO can be a huge barrier to achieving this goal. --------

Certainly, Agree.

In XLM, EGO is a product of Layer 3.
without Aware of what happen in Layer 3, This EGO issue cannot be solved. One needs to go to Layer 4 to solve Layer 3's delusion. IMHO

Why is Ego needed? --------

First one has to define what is an EGO?

IMHO, EGO is an attribute mistakenly taken as the Real Master or Boss. Such as when one mistaken one's bank account number as oneself.

The Attribute is always needed but the delusion of making the attribute as the Master is an issue.

IE:

Keanu Reeves is Neo in Matrix. the attribute Neo is needed to make the movie Matrix. However, if Keanu takes Neo as Him and operate as according to Neo's role after finished making of Matrix. then that is the issue arise.

And if it is, I'm thinking that it needs to be subdued, --------

IMHO,
There is nothing needs to be subdue but to be "set Free".

IE:
if Keanu deludedly took Neo as Him. That Took is an delusion. Keanu himself created this delusion. So, as soon as Keanu let go the delusion. it is just a delusion which will fade away.

However, if Keanu created this delusion and then trying to subdue this delusion. Then, there is an inner war going which is draining oneself. This will not produce peace but more unsettle.

Thus, in the shurangama sutra, the Buddha said "

“With your own mind, you grasp at your own mind.
What is not illusory turns into illusion.
If you don’t grasp, there is no non-illusion.
If even non-illusion does not arise,
How can illusory dharmas be established?
This is called the Wonderful Lotus Flower,
The Regal Vajra Gem of Enlightenment.

http://online.sfsu.edu/%7Erone/Buddhism/Shurangama/ps.ss.02.v4.020526.screen.pdf

However, to be able to do this, one needs the Awareness which can Aware of where the delusion comes from.

In the XLM model, one needs to get to Layer 4 the layer of Awareness to Aware of "set free or release the "grasp" or the latching in Layer 3.

As Einsteint said, One cannot solve one's problem in the level thinking one generate it.

Thus, Layer 4 is needed otherwise the EGO has no way out.

just as muscle strength must be subdued on the physical side in order to achieve pure power. ---------

Again, IMHO, there are not much to be subdue because subdue will create inner war, Aware of and set free seems to be the path.

Thus, since there is 1, physical, 2, emotional, 3,Mental power, and 4,Awareness ( there are more then these if one goes into 5 skandhas, but XLM uses 4 to cover and address what is the basic minimum. IMHO.

As we can see from these:

http://www.stresseraser.com/biology/bio.html
http://www.stresseraser.com/biology/bio5.html
http://www.stresseraser.com/how_it_works/works2.html

We need to address the basic 4 layers in order to be able to work on ourself.
and each Layers (whatever one wants to called it) has to be AWARE-NIZED. to make it alive. IE: so that each layer has its own intelligent to Aware instead of just execute. That is what the Training of the layers of XLM is about, AWARE-Nized the layer.

In additional, why is lots of Theory doesnt work?

IMHHHO, one of the possibility among many is because those theory exist only in Layer 3.

It has no link to Layer 2 or even Layer 1 the physical layer. Or it is not even Aware of the characteristics of Layer 1 physical. and further more the mental layer or layer 3 is overwriting Layer 4.

Even worst, what can be force to operate due to the Will of layer 3 in demonstration doesnt work in "real life" because the Layer 3 doesnt aware of the control condition of demonstration and the full capasity of the Layer 3 is no longer true in the "real life" because, now, the layer 1, 2, and 4 is on different states to taking care of they own stuffs. Say a fight or fly situation. ...

So, IMHHO, those who has master themself and the art or Born as a Nature can Just Do it. However, in general including me, if not pay attention to what is going on. There will be a time of the mind says go and the body say no. and create big confusion which get one really really stuck.

Thus, if say SLT/SNT was not train with a clear Layer 1,2,3,4. Then, there is not much SLT/SNT will offer but major fantasy of Layer 3 --- just latch in the rigid stance and fantasy walla somedays one can fly. IMHO.and nothing is going to happen.

Again, Layer 4 is the layer of surrendering, in this layer, the Comes recieve, Goes send back, Letting go moves forward, using silence/still to manage action. That IMHO is ariving at a setting free state instead of a figthing state which is stuck at layer 3. and the paradigm of subdue is actually an indication of Layer 3 operation thinking it can control everything. To shift from the Layer 3 is the big boss paradigm to all layers has equal say paradigm is a paradigm or model shift.

Finally, Ofcause XLM is not the ultimate, it is just an introductory if it can be. IMHO, we needs to starts somewhere.

Just some thoughts.

Peace and lots of love.

Matrix

01-21-2006, 07:55 PM

what if the Layers are not something one formulate with deduction of mind speculation?.In Wing Chun, the use of deduction of the mind would be seen as an unecessary layer, IMO.
It slows the response, and can actually paralyze, even if only for a moment.

IMHO, EGO is an attribute mistakenly taken as the Real Master or Boss. Such as when one mistaken one's bank account number as oneself.Bank account, career, looks, physical strength etc are all external frames of reference that appeal to the ego. However, as you say, they do not reflect the true self.

IMHO,
There is nothing needs to be subdue but to be "set Free"..You are correct. The use of the word "subdued" is an error, although I would not say "set free" either since the Ego is already running free in our self-talk. We are constantly judging and evaluating (often in a negative way). We must silence the Ego and this is done without force (as would be the case in subduing).

As Einsteint said, One cannot solve one's problem in the level thinking one generate it. See above. I agree.

Again, IMHO, there are not much to be subdue because subdue will create inner war, Aware of and set free seems to be the path. Again, the use of the word "subdue is not correct. Muscle strength needs to be "silenced" or relaxed in order to release the power.

Thus, since there is 1, physical, 2, emotional, 3,Mental power, and 4,Awareness ( there are more then these if one goes into 5 skandhas, but XLM uses 4 to cover and address what is the basic minimum. IMHO.IMO, if you have true Awareness, then mental power is not required. Mental processes slow add complexity and can actually reduce Awareness.

IMHHHO, one of the possibility among many is because those theory exist only in Layer 3. I too have a theory, based on a simple model. The number of times that one insists that one is humble is inversely proportinal to the true level of humility. I've been dying to say this for some time .... that's my Ego talking. ;)

Thus, if say SLT/SNT was not train with a clear Layer 1,2,3,4. Then, there is not much SLT/SNT will offer but major fantasy of Layer 3 --- just latch in the rigid stance and fantasy walla somedays one can fly. IMHO.and nothing is going to happen.. In the beginning we need to use mental power to learn the basic movements and concepts. At some point Level 3 should be removed from the equation. That level becomes unnecessary and counter-productive, IMO.

Peace and lots of love.Same to you...

anerlich

01-21-2006, 09:26 PM

May be the truth is to peel them away.

The problem with this "theory", like its predecessors, is that rather than peeling stuff away, more of something disagreeable is getting laid on thick.

Just some thoughts, IMHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHO

Peace, Love, Woodstock

Hendrik

01-21-2006, 09:54 PM

IMO, if you have true Awareness, then mental power is not required. Mental processes slow add complexity and can actually reduce Awareness. -------

IMHO, Mental power -will, intention..etc is always there analogue to the infrared focusing light.
Say if we want to do a task. we need to focus on the task. Mental Power is great to use in the focusing and short term sustaining...etc

I too have a theory, based on a simple model. The number of times that one insists that one is humble is inversely proportinal to the true level of humility. I've been dying to say this for some time .... that's my Ego talking. ;) --------

Count me in too since I am just human too.

You see, the 3rd Layer, as soon as I lost my awareness in that Layer, and "forgot" about the 4th layer. I am going to get spin or carry away by the Layer 3.

IMHO, The signature is --- I am starting to NOT allow things beside what I want to happen. When that happen, then I know I am in trouble because I am NOT ALLOW, I want to play GOD, things has to be MY WAY! That is not Surrender the Will...

So if Surrender the Will and ALLOW are missing then I know my layer 4 is block. if I am aware enough to notice the trouble is start snow balling. sometimes I dont even notice that. So that is the time to be in real trouble.

In additional, Thus, I have heard from some experience Buddhist monks. What i was told is that there needs energy intensity to "live" at a certain consciouness level. So, IMHO, to be able to constantly living with Layer 4 always "shine" needs a certain energy might be similar to those who has open the 4th Chakra.

one of the reason about the XLM using the Neural Network concept. is that the Neural Network can be " trained" to have intelligent. That is analogue to the mind and body
can be AWARE-Nized.

for Layer 3, if it was train to be more intelligent or fill with more Awareness, then one can be having a more clear head. and ofcause, that also means the total energy level needs to be raise. otherwise, it is back to just layer 3 speculation or fantasy.

IMHO, things is more complex then it is because, Layer 3 is supported by Layer 1. So, in order to raise the Energy of Layer 3. Layer 1 has to be having a strong based. That then get one back to training the Layer 1 or the physical body. A sick physical will not aid the mental power.

on the other hand, it also get link to Layer 2 the Breathing. This Breathing stuff is a subtle stuff because it can shut the heck out of Layer 1 and Layer 3 or bring them into Chaos. Some times people get so Mad or EGO running wild to want things to be happening thier way to the degree that they even STOP breathing or panting which create all kind of blockages.

if things happen over and over again, then, this can become a pattern in different layer. if that pattern form, That really really cause problem. because as soon as something triggling the pattern run automatically influencing every layer and Layer 4 block....

And, if one is not aware of the existing of the "layers" and the possiblity of "pattern" in the layer to be release. and the possible of the Layer can be Aware-nized Then one is really having a no way out.

Thus, the XLM is not only target to address the important layers and also the Pre-training and training. It is very critical to find out these habit if they exist. and it is very important to know and have the Pre-training state needed and the condition and process of the training.

IE: just a case from many different cases, to observe or release the pattern in Layer 3, the pre-training conditoning is one needs to lose up Layer 1, and running with deep breathing (layer 2) for a while until the body and mind entering a state of "loose and tranquility". there, one might notice the pattern of excessive or agitated...etc , and at the loose and tranquil state one might start affirm willingness to surrender and release or forgive or let go.... etc .using the Layer 3 to release layer 3 with the layer 1 and Layer 2 setting the platform or support for the release.

BTW. I like the stresserase
http://www.stresseraser.com/how_it_works/works1.html
because it can show the mind body connection to a certain degree. then the Brain wave machine to show other extension. Thus, we can really observe the Mind/Body handling.

WCK is great because it is an AWARE-NiZED every Layer and let every layer return to its nature type of art. Nothing to be remember or program at the end but surfing the nature. IMHO

In the beginning we need to use mental power to learn the basic movements and concepts. At some point Level 3 should be removed from the equation. That level becomes unnecessary and counter-productive, IMO. --------

Great!

You know, train and train hard. then via your experience make a model to share. Since we all are different. The more people having model the better we all can compare notes. That way we all improve.

Peace and Lot of Love

anerlich

01-22-2006, 02:49 AM

Can you name one Open Fight Tourny held yearly from the WC camp that allows others to enter?

Such tournaments are unnecessary in a world where many major cities have regular kickboxing and MMA events. . To test yourself, you should be comparing your skills with the world at large, not just within your own style.

anerlich

01-22-2006, 02:52 AM

Open Fight Tourny held yearly from the WC camp

That's an oxymoron. It can't be both open and restricted to WC.

anerlich

01-22-2006, 02:59 AM

The number of times that one insists that one is humble is inversely proportinal to the true level of humility.

By that logic, you are demonstrably one of the most egotistical *******s that ever walked the Earth ("IMHO, IMHO, IMHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHO").

I've been dying to say this for some time .... that's my Ego talking. --------

Thank you, Captain Obvious.

You see, the 3rd Layer, as soon as I lost my awareness in that Layer, and "forgot" about the 4th layer. I am going to get spin or carry away by the Layer 3.

You really are quite captivated by your own mental processes. Your mistake is assuming anyone else is, with the possible exception of students of abnormal psychology.

Get over yourself, please.

Matrix

01-22-2006, 08:15 AM

Get over yourself, please.
Hey andrew, I'm just having a little fun. Don't take it so seriously. We're not curing cancer here. Sorry if my comments have offended you or anyone else.

Peace out....

planetwc

01-22-2006, 08:49 AM

Hendrik,

You don't need a "model"--that just complicates what needs to be simple.

What you do need is a training program that produces consistent and measurable results.

Forget the pop/sci/engineering stuff. Simplify.

What is your training program that generates results for someone to be an effective fighter?

Can you produce students who can fight?

If you can't, all the models in the world aren't going to help them or you.

Go look at BJJ to see how a system can produce consistent results, using a consistent teaching/training/sparring method.

If you can't get students to have the basics, forget about "cultivation of chi" and other esoteric stuff. Can students of Wing Chun fight using it's principles against resisting opponents?

If they can't then your teaching program is flawed. Fix it.

When you can, then establish a process for consitent results and move to the next level.

Rinse, repeat.

Hendrik

01-22-2006, 06:55 PM

Hendrik,

You don't need a "model"--that just complicates what needs to be simple.

What you do need is a training program ...........

Certainly, it is not simple as I hope.

Thanks for your great Ideas on bench marking...etc.

Hendrik

01-22-2006, 07:07 PM

Some might ask, What is in WCK that operate in Layer 3?

Mun of Mun Sao or asking Hand is a Layer 3 stuffs. The mental action of Intentionally Asking is a component of Layer 3.

as the saying:

"Ask and It is given. "

Ask is Layer 3 where one innitiate. and one surrender and Allow the "Given " to show up. that is Layer 4 deal.

Thus,
the mentality of Mun Sau and Using silence to manage the action (comes retain, Goes send back...) are working together.
one is asking and the other is recieving.
Ask ( layer 3) and Allow and embrace what happen to happen ( Layer 4)

the more we are clear about these two layers the better we know which one are we using or Activating. IMHO.

anerlich

01-22-2006, 10:31 PM

Hey andrew, I'm just having a little fun. Don't take it so seriously. We're not curing cancer here. Sorry if my comments have offended you or anyone else.

Hey buddy, you're cool, I was bashing Hendrik.

Jim Roselando

01-23-2006, 07:48 AM

ghostofwingchun

01-23-2006, 08:38 AM

Hey Ghost,

There are lots of average events for the average guys and the full time guys to compete in. No doubt! People state this or that is marlarkey and yet that is stated based on no experiece or exposer! So, why not experience it before discussing its validity? :confused:

You state WCK guys compete in events! Sure! Lots of people do! NHB events like Pride or UFC? I would still like to know who are these WCK sifus competing in the pro category events and winning? Please provide us with some names!

Its like Boxing! There are lots of local clubs and events one can enter or go to. Is that the same as fighting Floyd Mayweather? Nah! Apples and Oranges my friend! No different from the average MA guy and the full time MA guy. There is a difference! A Sifu in NY mentions to me:

Jim,

You cannot compare the average guy to WXZ! Keep in mind he is a Yi Chuan sifu and that is why WXZ came up! WXZ was trained properly since he was 13 years old. He never did anything else but research/train Kung Fu, teach and fight. That was his profession. But! The average guy can benefit from his vast research and training. In the end it will be up to the individual and how far they take it.

Pretty sensible.

If someone wants to feel the results of the training HS mentions then tere are places that one can feel it. One person posting was from Tokyo where there is a big organization and open event. Its also the area in which guys like Kykoshin's Oyama studied Yi Chuan and others. Not a bad place to see and feel something or somethings effectiveness.

Just one example!

I really dont feel like re-debating this old subject. Look up Terence's discussions regarding this! He debates it about as well as anyone can! Speaking of that! Where is our boddy T?

Regards,

Mr Roseland thank you so much for your reply! Yes you are right I do not know of any wc people winning in pro NHB events . . . I believe I said that . . . but they have competed in them and lost . . . some have now competed in amatuer and won . . . I am not thinking that pro and amatuer is apples and oranges though . . . two different categories . . . pro is just next level up in sport . . . pros come from amatuers in all sports . . . lol . . . I am thinking Mr Hendrik's model is interesting . . . but I am thinking that such a model is too complex for any sport . . . I can not think of any sport with a model . . . especially one this complex . . . I am not saying some one can not make it work . . . I am just saying that for me and my needs it is way too complex . . . the test of model I am thinking is whether it is helpful to student . . . if this model is helpful to you this is great . . . and this I am thinking is bottom line . . . we can not say model is good or bad on paper . . . since our performance is not on paper. You seem to suggest that Mr Hendrik's model is Yi Chuan model . . . is this the case . . . if so why do wc when we can do Yi Chuan instead?

Thanks,

Ghost

Jim Roselando

01-23-2006, 09:05 AM

Hendrik

01-23-2006, 12:28 PM

How complicated is it or is it us making it more complicated?

Lets see:

Level 1: Basic training structure and tools to build natural connected body

Level 2: Harmonized level one with cultivated 6D Force, breathing and Chi awareness monitor

Level 3: A more natural level two with good awareness and beginning to let go or relaxed mind for functioning in the now.

Level 4: All natural and harmonized etc..

The only thing I see being complicated is understanding the difference between Rou body and not Rou body without training. Other than that?.......

:

A few comments I would like to share. They are just IMHO and Thus I have heard. So, dont take me as whatever I said is right. just a sharing.

1, The whole model is not simple as I hope indeed. The reason of the complex is that the model is created so that it can run in Debug mode and knows what is the range of the outcome eventhought we might never know the exact specific. we know what is very very likely to be.

IE: if something goes wrong or lost in the training or training process, one always can go back tracing the path one comes from.

In both training and Debug mode, One always can focus on one or two or any number of Layer to deal with while makes other layers as Back Ground support. So one always look closely at the layer/layers of interest while not losing track on the other layers.

2, in Real time, all layers HAVE to operate in Equally or Paraller. Because There is no such things as Layers in Real Time. All is one and One is all. Failing to recognized this is leading to a delusion. focus on One layer and just train that layer, thinking that is the ultimate cause problem. IE : focus on the 3rd layer and keep thinking or speculating and never train the Layer 1 or physical much. That called for weakness when all layer have to operate in Equally or Paraller.

3, Kung Fu IMHO is define by the depth of mastering in each Layer and the Operation of all layers in real time.

Thus, just mastering a layer or two have some kung fu but one knows the limitation. Also, there is no conflic in learning BJJ or TKD or any other style will surface in the future.... that is because BJJ might shine light on the blind spot one has in Layer 1. IE: if one never operate one's body in a certain way. Or might shine light on the blind spot one has in Layer 3. IE: if one never ever think that a ceratin way is possible. The different between using the XLM to learn compare with other models is that XLM required one to consciously know what is going on and XLM suggest that there is also Learn to UN LEarning beside the general Learning to know something.

So, learning about applications is deepen and broadern the Layer or Layers. There is no conflict. Because the ultimate goal is about Harmonzied with Nature or Dao mimic Nature or Surrendering to Nature.

4, IMHHO, Layer 3 and Layer 4 needs to be seperate because, in general, one can read about Zen, NOw, Mind, Yee, Awareness, Shen... etc however, nothing clear about what is what. and Some even mistaken Zen as just be unclear or fuzzy about any idea is Zen. Awareness is mistaken as Conscious identification. Then, there is EGO. the Master is taken as the "good fair humble" Guy, not knowing that is the EGO itself.

So, Layer 3 is about all the Nature function of mental power, such as Will, Intention, thinking, focus, mental processing...etc we dont create them and we dont want to eliminate them because they are all a part of Nature. the Issue is we missed use them instead of they are bad.

And, Layer 4 is the Awareness or know.

IE: the saying in WCK, "using silence/stillness to manage the action" and "Silence the mind and using the Yee"

if one is not clear about what is what in Layer 3 and Layer 4.
Do we even know that it is possible we can quiet down the mind via not thinking more thoughts? if we dont then we have no way to make the "Silence the mind and using the Yee" because we have no way to quiet down the mind.

since thinking and Intention are both in Layer 3. So, A, the continous thinking will influence the Intention or focus the energy in Layer 3 is not effectively used. B, Trying to subdue the thoughts is actually fighting an inner war within oneself.

Thus, IMHO, Thus, I have heard, one has to go into Layer 3, 4 and knows what is what to be able to deal or handling what is going on.

Thus, I have heard,

IE: Comes retain, Goes send back, let go and rush forward, using silence to manage the action.

The question is : does one has a well train Layer 1, 2, 3, 4 to implement the above saying? if not, then the saying above is just a wishfull saying.

Look at it closely in a very crude way on the condition or training of each layer and layers to implement the above kuen kuit.

Layer 1: is the physical platform ready and not tense up unconsciously in all conditon? Layer 2, is the breathing ready and not stop breathing at all condition? Layer 3, is the intention or asking ready and just ask instead of forcing the situation? Layer 4, does one really surrender or surfing the Nature at all condition?

In addition,
Thus, I have heard,

how is the rythm of every layer and all layers congruent with the applications or the conditon?

People wants to discuss about Timing.

But without Knowing to a certain degree the rythm of every layer how is Timing possible be well implemented?

One of such common ccase is one knows it is the Timing to strike, however, the breathing shutdown or run into stop breathing or layer 2 hold mode and force the heck out of the Layer 1 to do fast strike...etc.
That action of breathing, influence the oxigen and blood flow in one's body. the body is then running into a different mode. So, one needs to know the rythm of each layer since this is a part of the Nature of that particular layer and all layers integrated.

Furthermore, if Layer 3 in any one second take over as the master of all layers because the Intention is hold as Must happen. Then, there is no Comes Retain, Goes send it back. But, DO IT MY WAY!

Thus, does one practiced what one is preaching? IMHO, without knowing what is going on each layer and all layers integration. We have no idea.

Saying that, ofcause there is no way in one day and suddenly one knows all about the layers and... become perfect. In acient China, Thus I have heard, the mastering of Kung Fu is a living Journey not about mastering an application. People work on every "layer" (using the XLM language here only, you can use any language as you like).

Thus, I never belive in the legend that wCK is invent to be simple and quick learn because there is law of nature that one cannot changes. IE: how long one needs to make a baby.

on the other side, I am also believe in the legent that WCK is invent to be simple and quick learn. That is because if SLT lay all these layers and details out clearly, no matter how complex one might look at the first glance. it is much much much better off then those Standing there doing sets and set swithout an idea of what is one doing.

Thus, I have heard, some has said, get rid of those Zen stuffs or shen stuffs or using intention stuffs. until one knows what is what. otherwise, one is kidding oneself within one's thinking and speculations.

Just some thoughts.

BTW. IMHO, The interesting part of Layer 4 is that it lead to surrendering to God, take refuge to Buddha, surfing the Nature... spiritual ideas. I am not going into detail about these here but I want to share three people ( introduce in random order and ofcorse there are more great people we can learn from ) we can learn from for those who is interested in.

IMHO, It is always great to learn from real action record then our own speculation.

a, St. Padre Pio, http://www.ewtn.com/padrepio/man/

b, Ven. Hsuan Hua (Chan tradition)http://www.advite.com/sf/life/lifeindex.html

c, Dr. Ma Li-tang (TCM, CMA, Qigong tradition) http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=it&u=http://www.associazionemedicina.it/medicina/medicina.nsf/Template02Show%3FOpenForm%26lng%3D1%26ParentUNID%3 D6E864897C5397A48C1256F200033497E&prev=/search%3Fq%3DMa%2Bli-tang%26start%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26rls%3DRNWE,R NWE:2004-47,RNWE:en%26sa%3DN

Peace and Love

ghostofwingchun

01-23-2006, 01:46 PM

Ghost!

The Model Hendrik is using is not specifically Yi Chuan! It is specifically, Rou Jing!

How complicated is it or is it us making it more complicated?

Lets see:

Level 1: Basic training structure and tools to build natural connected body

Level 2: Harmonized level one with cultivated 6D Force, breathing and Chi awareness monitor

Level 3: A more natural level two with good awareness and beginning to let go or relaxed mind for functioning in the now.

Level 4: All natural and harmonized etc..

The only thing I see being complicated is understanding the difference between Rou body and not Rou body without training. Other than that?

Yi Chuan insides and Wing Chun insides are pretty much the same. In order for an art to be Rou it has to be pretty much the same. So, sometimes when you want to understand the pro'/con's of a specific method you need to examine different approaches and compare the before and after otherwise we dont know? We only speculate!

For me! I was curious about this elusive Chi and everyone I talked to or looked into all started off with one core training! Whats that training?

Standing!

The standing is minimum effort and maximum results for the body and mind integration. Even in WCK all our sets begin and end with Standing. Seeing how WXZ was one of the most recent sifu's, actually one of the first to openly teach this stuff, I look to him as anotre source of Rou info./development.

Standing is not the be all end all tho! Just the basics! What good is what we cultivate (the rou body) if it is not functional or help our development? So, like all the old debates, all that matter is positive growth and a human body has lots of stuff. Including the Insides! I do not or neve did change anything else I was doing in my WCK practice other than add about 20 minutes a day of inside stuff.

After all! What governs the body? What is the command central of the whole body? "Xin" or Mind

Thanks for the chat whomever you are! hahaha

:cool:

Mr Roselando thank you for attempting to explain Mr Hendrik's Rou Jing model to me! I am sorry but as I said this model . . . or any model really . . . is not for me . . . I do not believe in chi or mysterious forces . . . but this is just me . . . for me it is useful to see things in terms of how human being learn and develop motor skills since wc and sports are motor skills . . . information on that is readily available to those who are interested . . . if some people want to believe in chi or mysterious forces this is up to them. Of course our brain is involved in motor activity . . . and not just cognitive function . . . I can not lift finger with out brain involvement . . . but many if not most motor skills are learned and developed it is my experience without much conscious mental involvement . . . rather it is the body that learns motor skills from the doing . . . you learn to throw a ball by trying to throw the ball . . . and doing it over and over again and body will fiind through feedback how to best do it . . . this is the same in all sports . . . now we could take learning to throw ball through Mr. Hendrik's four stage model but that would I am thinking be counter productive . . . much easier just to have student to toss the ball around. . . anyway this is my thinking . . . others may have different ways . . . this is great.

Thanks,

Ghost

Jim Roselando

01-23-2006, 02:33 PM

Ghost,

I appreciate your opinions. I have had this debate numerous times with Terence and others. Please look some up for more in depth back and forth fun!

With regards to motor skills/physical activity being mental. Well, interesting POV and common. All I can say is try your physical activity with and without any of this stuff and then tell me if you think it has value to your kung fu or not. Thats one way! The brain fuels the body. Anything we can do/learn in life comes thru experience/awareness, practicing what we have just been made aware of and doing what we have just been practicing etc. See a similar patter to HS progression?

I do not believe people learn anything from just doing. (well, not unless they are ready for the doing) You can but then that relies solely on DNA/Luck you pick what will work for your body. Just doing is the difference between a the guy who paints with training and without. What's the difference? The details! This is the case for any activity. Do you think Davinci would have painted as well as he did if he did not study constantly under Verocial (sp?) for many years? :confused: So, as Gungfu hillbilly said:

This is where I must strongly disagree. Do you think that great coaches don’t put together training plans? Workout routines? Strategy guides? What do they do, just show up and say, “ok boys, play.”

Can you honestly tell me that you believe that an NFL football coach is flying blind with no idea of where he is going; merely making stuff up as he goes along? Or that with millions of dollars on the line top pro boxers or NBA basketball players trust their careers to dumb luck and chance?

(If you believe all of that then I have a bridge I’d like to sell ya.)

Isn’t it more likely that these coaches are highly organized, highy scientific in their planning and coordination of theory and application? And that they use this knowledge (dare I say models ) to help train and guide their athletes?

Regards,

Hendrik

01-23-2006, 02:47 PM

IMHO

I do not believe in chi ------

What is Chi?

Chi is an energy flow in the body.

In general,
Chi's intensity can be increased and Noticed
with training which achiving all of the following at the same time.

A, physical body (Layer 1 ) is in a loose relax state,
B, breathing ( Layer 2 ) is in a deep and long state (generally with Nature low abdoment breathing) ,
C, Mind (layer 3) is in a quiet and singer focus state,
and,
D, Awareness (layer 4) is in a clear Know but non-judgemenatal state.

With chi cultivation, one can use it as an indicator of biofeedback to monitor or scan one's body(layer 1), breathing ( layer 2), Mind states (layer 3), Awaress state (layer 4). IE: if one can intensify the Chi then one knows one get hold of Layer 1,2,3, and 4. As for how much one get hold on that depend..... But everyone who is alive will be able to do it with some training.

otherwise, one pay $$ to buy this
http://www.stresseraser.com/how_it_works/works1.html
but still has to work with the breathing if one has no idea how to breath. :D

What is so mysterious? It is another degree of freedom some wants it some doesnt think about it.

Imagine doing Yoga without Kundalini. Practice in Jesus' teaching without the Holy spirit. That is similar to doing CMA without Qi.

One Be able to KNOW chi is just as simple as " knowing the body and mind " more, ( thus, one doesnt have to carry various different biofeedback electronics high tech garget with one and read them at every instant .. :D )

Thus, one can give the body and mind a better chance to develop and heal itself. As where is the energy or healing from, That is the question for beyond the Layer 4 ....

Thus, I have heard,

some one told me.
What is so mysterious about Chi?

Is it that we dont know what it is as what is a ghost so we creating our own Chi description? (as saying in Chinese one can always be right of drawing a ghost because none have seen one thus one can make up and always correct.)
or because we have never practice it and know what is it that get us into the fear of the unknow
or we just love fantasy and that we think Chi as a wishfull thinking such as "comes retains, goes send it back.... using silence to manage action.." something we never dare to dream will attain?

IMHO.

Liddel

01-23-2006, 03:30 PM

Quote from Hendrik
" In Summary...." LOL

Here i was thinking summary meant -
1) A brief account giving the main points of something OR
2) Performed quickly.

Though i do admire your persistance Mr Hendrik.... :D
A valuable asset in fighting :cool:

ghostofwingchun

01-23-2006, 06:09 PM

IMHO

What is Chi?

Chi is an energy flow in the body.

In general,
Chi's intensity can be increased and Noticed
with training which achiving all of the following at the same time.

A, physical body (Layer 1 ) is in a loose relax state,
B, breathing ( Layer 2 ) is in a deep and long state (generally with Nature low abdoment breathing) ,
C, Mind (layer 3) is in a quiet and singer focus state,
and,
D, Awareness (layer 4) is in a clear Know but non-judgemenatal state.

With chi cultivation, one can use it as an indicator of biofeedback to monitor or scan one's body(layer 1), breathing ( layer 2), Mind states (layer 3), Awaress state (layer 4). IE: if one can intensify the Chi then one knows one get hold of Layer 1,2,3, and 4. As for how much one get hold on that depend..... But everyone who is alive will be able to do it with some training.

otherwise, one pay $$ to buy this
http://www.stresseraser.com/how_it_works/works1.html
but still has to work with the breathing if one has no idea how to breath. :D

What is so mysterious? It is another degree of freedom some wants it some doesnt think about it.

Imagine doing Yoga without Kundalini. Practice in Jesus' teaching without the Holy spirit. That is similar to doing CMA without Qi.

One Be able to KNOW chi is just as simple as " knowing the body and mind " more, ( thus, one doesnt have to carry various different biofeedback electronics high tech garget with one and read them at every instant .. :D )

Thus, one can give the body and mind a better chance to develop and heal itself. As where is the energy or healing from, That is the question for beyond the Layer 4 ....

Thus, I have heard,

some one told me.
What is so mysterious about Chi?

Is it that we dont know what it is as what is a ghost so we creating our own Chi description? (as saying in Chinese one can always be right of drawing a ghost because none have seen one thus one can make up and always correct.)
or because we have never practice it and know what is it that get us into the fear of the unknow
or we just love fantasy and that we think Chi as a wishfull thinking such as "comes retains, goes send it back.... using silence to manage action.." something we never dare to dream will attain?

IMHO.

Mr Hendrik it is fine if you want to believe this . . . for me I do not think there is any such thing as energy flow in body . . . the body has various circulatory mechanisms . . . like the flow of blood in body . . . there is air flow in lungs. . . lymphatic system flow . . . and so on . . . but no energy flow . . . not like electricity running through body . . . lol . . . this is medical view of bygone age . . . the body has various well documented and proven energy producing mechanisms . . . any one who is interested can do a bit of research and find out what those are.

Thanks,

Ghost

Liddel

01-23-2006, 07:18 PM

Hendrik

01-23-2006, 08:36 PM

Quote from Hendrik

Though i do admire your persistance Mr Hendrik.... :D
A valuable asset in fighting :cool:

You know what OSU of Kyokushin composed with XLM view angle? :D

Osu is the one word that you'll hear the most in a Kyokushin dojo or at a Kyokushin tournament. When you enter or leave the dojo, you bow and say "Osu". When you greet a fellow Kyokushin karateka, you say "Osu" instead of "hello". When you respond to an instruction or question in class, you say "Osu" instead of "yes" or "I understand". When performing kihon waza (basic techniques) in class, each technique is often accompanied with a loud "Osu". When practicing jiyu kumite (free fighting) in class and your opponent lands a good, hard technique, you say "Osu" to acknowledge your opponent's skill. As a measure of respect, knockdown fighters at a tournament bow and say "Osu" to the front, to the referee and to each other, before and after the fight. Osu is used in many situations and seems to mean a lot of things. But what does it really mean?

http://www.uskyokushin.com/osu.htm

While fighting, you stand facing your opponent. When the opponent attacks, you must quickly determine an attack is coming, what form it will take, where it is aimed, etc. All of this information must be relayed to the brain, where the decision is made about how to react. The brain must send a message to the body, telling it how to defend itself. This entire process takes only a fraction of a second, but what if the incoming attack is a fraction of a second faster?

If, on the other hand, you are in a Zen state while in combat, you perceive not the individual attack, but the entire situation. Your mind and body act as one, bypassing the normal reaction time to automatically perform the necessary defense measure. The normal thought process in an attack is: perception, contemplation and, finally, reaction. With Zen, you can bypass the contemplation phase and react directly after perception. Oyama, having realized this, has gone so far as to say "Karate is Zen," a thus, he makes Zen an integral part of his system.

http://www.diegobeltran.com/htms/oyama/oyamalegend.htm

I would say, atleast Layer 1, 2, 3 and 4. :D:D:D

Hendrik

01-23-2006, 08:44 PM

it is fine if you want to believe this . . . ----

what you want to believe or think. You can believe or think as what you like. it is a free will world. And we all are mature enough to respect everyone's freedom.

not like electricity running through body . . . lol . . . this is medical view of bygone age .-------

Read the following and enjoy the Heart Electric System :D

http://www.childrenheartinstitute.org/educate/heartwrk/elechhse.htm

Furthermore,
IMHHHO,

There is a different between Believe and Facture existance which one can repeatly generate or produce succesfully. The Chinese' Qi, the Yoga's Kundalini.....etc.

Thus, It is not about Believe it is about Facture existance. That has to be clear.

or else, as my Aunt said in the chinese moon festival, those apolo stuffs is just a believe, they never land on moon, but movies making in hollywood. :D

anerlich

01-23-2006, 08:51 PM

as my Aunt said in the chinese moon festival, those apolo stuffs is just a believe, they never land on moon, but movies making in hollywood.

Sounds like your "talents" for incomprehensibility and improbable beliefs are genetically based.

Hendrik

01-23-2006, 09:03 PM

I believe in the "cultivation of chi " as Hendrik puts it, though i may not put as much faith in it.

I also agree with ghost when he said -
"the body has various well documented and proven energy producing mechanisms "

But dont discount ghost, the placebo affect or physco sematic bi product of the belief in it... real or not it can have "real effects" on performance.

That said, to me its effects on performance are not enough to make it the cornerstone of a training programme, and we all know one can fight without it !

Did you just want to discuss this openly hendrik or are you just limping toward a point ?

IMHO
If you have activate the Kundalini or Qi then you sure are more then welcome to share your experience with us and discuss it openly, I am sure there are people who is in this forum as those NeiJia people knows what they are dealing with can discuss with you.

otherwise, speculation is just a waste of time because your guess or speculation and my guess or speculation doesnt mean a thing. right?

we all know one can fight without it !--------- L

in Chinese a dead person is called Tuan Qi meaning the Qi or Chi has stop, no more Qi, Without Qi! :D
So, I dont know any one who is Tuan Qi can still fight. :D

Just my speculation, because I have not experience Tuan Qi yet. :D
For those fighters, May be they dont focus on thier Qi or aware of or want to know about thier Qi but I am sure they are not Tuan Qi as I never have seen any Vampire or Zombi yet. :D

http://www.subwaycinema.com/frames/archives/gore2002/vampire.htm

Did you just want to discuss this openly or are you just limping toward a point?

Ok, enough fun and relax.

seriously,

if you read my previous post.
This is my view.

"One Be able to KNOW chi is just as simple as " knowing the body and mind " more, ( thus, one doesnt have to carry various different biofeedback electronics high tech garget with one and read them at every instant .. )

Thus, one can give the body and mind a better chance to develop and heal itself."

if one think they want it then cultivate it. If one doesnt think they want or need it then as soon as one is not Tuan Qi,:D
they can do what they want such as fighting or breathing. :D

However, in WCK's history across different lineages there are record about involvement with Qi which we cannot deny.

IE:
From YJKYM or letter 2 clamping Yang stance to the set "Kidney Qi return to its origin"...etc that is something we all cannot deny eventhough we might not know why they are important.

Thus, again, Layer 2 exist in WCK and we cannot discard or delete it because we might not understand what is it for. IMHHHO.

So, the best thing i suggest, IMHO, is that cultivate it. Get the Qi heat up atleast to see what kind of changes happen in one's body. Then, decide.

May be those who has it can share with us their experience and effect to thier performance, so that we get first hand information instead of we speculate with this fighter and that fighter instead of one own self?

IMHO

ghostofwingchun

01-23-2006, 09:35 PM

Hendrik

01-23-2006, 09:51 PM

James Randi has one million dollar challenge for any person that can prove the existence of chi . . . this seems quite an incentive to me . . . http://www.randi.org/research/index.html . . . if chi truly exists how difficult can it be to prove . . . and now you are millionaire. . . I am guessing that people who believe chi really exists . . . . all those chi gung practitioners for example . . . just do not want a million dollars . . . lol. I am sorry . . . I am not trying to redicule beliefs . . . I am trying to explain why I and perhaps others do not believe in such things . . . for very good reason . . . and so will not have serious consideration for any model or discussion of martial art which uses it as foundation.

Thanks,

Ghost

Give the million to Dr. Ma Li-Tang's Daugter, Ma family deserve all the millions and more for Dr. Ma Li-Tang had help healing thousand of chronic patients with Qigong and let them return to live healtily.

http://www.chinaqigong.net/english/qgsk/mxz.htm

BTW,

Dr. Ma Li-Tang was also a famous Chinese Martial artist with the Title " The Tank". he was the students of famous CMArtis chang Chan-Kui, aquinted of WXZ and others top CMA masters in China....

He turns down the big financial offer from coorporations to stay as a common doctor to help others.

See, not everything is measure with money. There is True unconditional love from these people such as Dr. Ma Li-Tang or St. Pio or Ven. Hsuan Hua who has been and beyond Layer 4.

since in general, thus I have heard, the mentality is --- Layer 3 is about ME, Layer 4 is about surrender and Layer 5 is about devotion....

Thus, I have heard, some said that, Love and peace hold higher and mightier then figthing and loaded bank account and Fame. and that is just what I have heard.

However, it is a free will world that one can choose what one love to based one's value on.
what one thinks it is important for them is respected IMHO.

Is one's WCK for figthing and fame or for Loving and Peace. That is free individual's choice.
IMHHO

Jim Roselando

01-24-2006, 07:01 AM

Hey Ghost!

Funny how you post the exact same stuff as our friend TN a while back! You are either a big fan of TN's posts from back in the day or search the same area for info. he did.

Whats your name stranger?

We are all friends here sharing and discussing. No need for secrecy among friends!

Tell us about yourself!

Peace,

GungFuHillbilly

01-24-2006, 08:27 AM

James Randi has one million dollar challenge for any person that can prove the existence of chi . . . this seems quite an incentive to me . . . http://www.randi.org/research/index.html . . . if chi truly exists how difficult can it be to prove . . . and now you are millionaire. . . I am guessing that people who believe chi really exists . . . . all those chi gung practitioners for example . . . just do not want a million dollars . . . lol. I am sorry . . . I am not trying to redicule beliefs . . . I am trying to explain why I and perhaps others do not believe in such things . . . for very good reason . . . and so will not have serious consideration for any model or discussion of martial art which uses it as foundation.

Thanks,

Ghost

Ghost,

Proof comes in many different contexts. James Randi is asking to 'scientifically' prove the existence of chi.

Since the dawning of modernity we have seen a continued growth of the religion of science: a dogmatic perspective that refuses to see anything that doesn't fit in its paradigm.

Science has a very good use, however contexts are different and science does not hold the whole truth for humanity. Human experience is beyond science. It's not that science is not a part of human knowledge; it is just not ALL of human knowledge.

Materialist science cannot give you proof of the beauty of music or explain the flavor of a fine meal or the meaning of Hamlet. However to argue that these are not valid forms of knowledge plummets us into relativism, where truth has no meaning.

I would pose this question...if the science of fighting is the 'right' perspective then why is it that western civilization has never created a tai chi, gung fu, or jiu-jitsu? (Let alone systems on the level of sophistication as yoga or acupuncture.)

I am not minimizing western culture as it has made its own contributions. I am just curious how you can completely discount 2,500 years of knowledge as completely mythical and not worthy of any 'serious' consideration.

-GFH

sihing

01-24-2006, 08:45 AM

Ghost,

Proof comes in many different contexts. James Randi is asking to 'scientifically' prove the existence of chi.

Since the dawning of modernity we have seen a continued growth of the religion of science: a dogmatic perspective that refuses to see anything that doesn't fit in its paradigm.

Science has a very good use, however contexts are different and science does not hold the whole truth for humanity. Human experience is beyond science. It's not that science is not a part of human knowledge; it is just not ALL of human knowledge.

Materialist science cannot give you proof of the beauty of music or explain the flavor of a fine meal or the meaning of Hamlet. However to argue that these are not valid forms of knowledge plummets us into relativism, where truth has no meaning.

I would pose this question...if the science of fighting is the 'right' perspective then why is it that western civilization has never created a tai chi, gung fu, or jiu-jitsu? (Let alone systems on the level of sophistication as yoga or acupuncture.)

I am not minimizing western culture as it has made its own contributions. I am just curious how you can completely discount 2,500 years of knowledge as completely mythical and not worthy of any 'serious' consideration.

-GFH

Do we even have the scientific tools available to prove the existence of Chi in this day and age? How would a scientist prove the existence of Chi anyways? Taking a picture of it? Haven't they already done that, isn't there a way to take a picture of the energy field that surrounds us?

Good post by the way GFH...

James

Jim Roselando

01-24-2006, 09:27 AM

Hey guys,

Chi can be proven! There are tools that can measure the heat etc.. Anyone who meets someone with good cultivation can also just ask them to let them feel it! Chinese doctors can be found in every city. Look one up!

Check out your Emei "snake" cousin getting tested in the lab!

http://www.exn.ca/video/?video=exn20031001-qigong.asx

Regards,

AmanuJRY

01-24-2006, 10:30 AM

Do we even have the scientific tools available to prove the existence of Chi in this day and age?How would a scientist prove the existence of Chi anyways?

How about quantum physics, pretty amazing when you read about the experiments (search; Bell's theorum).

And what about Dr. Masaru Emoto (http://www.life-enthusiast.com/twilight/research_emoto.htm)?

Who says science can't prove chi, but some people don't put much 'faith' in science (and some of them are scientists).

I think The Amazing Randi is looking for proof that people can do amazing (paranormal) things with chi.

Then there's a guy I saw on a Discovery Channel show (I tried searching for this guy-not the one Jim is referring to- and couldn't come up with any links, though), Dr. Jo, who they filmed with infrared cameras. He would roll a piece of aluminum foil in a damp handcloth and use 'chi' to heat it up to over 100 degrees (according to the IR readings).

How did he do that? And where's the Amazing Randi?

Modern psychology may refer to this as bio-feedback.

Taking a picture of it? Haven't they already done that, isn't there a way to take a picture of the energy field that surrounds us?

Kirlian photography. (http://www.fullspectrum.org.uk/)

But, even then there are skeptics who deny this is anything real.

ghostofwingchun

01-24-2006, 11:19 AM

People I am thinking believe in all kinds of things . . . if some one wants to believe in chi or Zen or other things this is their right . . . I am only saying that many others like me do not believe in such things . . . and we have good reasons for believing as we do . . . and we are not some crazy minority . . . lol . . . and I am not about to convert to this way of thinking so any model or belief based on chi for example will not be useful for me . . . in the end what it comes down to is whether or not your view helps you attain your goals or not . . . not so much whether it is factually true.

Mr Roselando I am not this TN person . . . and I tell you that I do not give personal information about myself over internet . . . but I am not going to get drawn into a 20 question thing . . . no I am not this person . . . no I am not tat person . . . until you figure out who I am . . . believe me you do not know me . . . you have never met me . . . and if I gave you my real name it would mean nothing to you . . . if I have silimar opinions to anyone this is not surprising . . . I do not ask if you are Mr. Hendrik even though you share same opinion . . . lol . . . of if Mr. Edmund is really Mr Parlati . . . I will tell you my occupation is in life sciences . . . this does not give me away . . . lol . . . so I look and think about things from this perspective. . . for example when you speak of generating heat . . . I do not doubt this happens . . . body of course can produce heat . . . but how can we say it is chi and not natural process of body that has nothing to do with mysterious energy . . . I am thinking that if people want to believe in chi they can find reasons to believe in it . . . this is human nature . . . science asks can you prove it to even those who do not want to believe . . . so that there is no denying it.

Thanks,

Ghost

Hendrik

01-24-2006, 11:34 AM

Ghost,

Proof comes in many different contexts. James Randi is asking to 'scientifically' prove the existence of chi.

Since the dawning of modernity we have seen a continued growth of the religion of science: a dogmatic perspective that refuses to see anything that doesn't fit in its paradigm.

Science has a very good use, however contexts are different and science does not hold the whole truth for humanity. Human experience is beyond science. It's not that science is not a part of human knowledge; it is just not ALL of human knowledge.

Materialist science cannot give you proof of the beauty of music or explain the flavor of a fine meal or the meaning of Hamlet. However to argue that these are not valid forms of knowledge plummets us into relativism, where truth has no meaning.

I would pose this question...if the science of fighting is the 'right' perspective then why is it that western civilization has never created a tai chi, gung fu, or jiu-jitsu? (Let alone systems on the level of sophistication as yoga or acupuncture.)

I am not minimizing western culture as it has made its own contributions. I am just curious how you can completely discount 2,500 years of knowledge as completely mythical and not worthy of any 'serious' consideration.

-GFH

GFH,

Excellent post .

I have even read somewhere in a famous business book,

saying that Business is an Art and science can aid the Art but science is not everything.

As for Western Culture, IMHO, due to the past 300 years or so of materialistic emphasis people might think western culture is materialistic bias. IMHO, there are wisdom as deep as the east. See, there are great people such as St. Padre Pio, Miceal Angelow, Da vinci.......

So, IMHO, human is human. take away the gender, race, nationality, religion,....east or west.
Love, Wisdom are equal for human from east or west.

IE: if we wake up from a comma where we lost all our memory, like a new born baby, we still can identify Love when some one send us caring Love. Love has no gender, race, nationality, religion, and wisdom arise from Love also have no gender, race, nationality, religion...east or west. we all are human. IMHHO.

Just my view and doesnt have to be agreed upon.

Hendrik

01-24-2006, 11:52 AM

. if some one wants to believe in chi or Zen or other things this is their right . . . I am only saying that many others like me do not believe in such things . . ----

Do you know that similar to Qi as I point out in my previous post,

Zen is a practice and not a believe?

isnt it better to find out what is it about before making a conclusion?

BTW,
In an XLM view, practice that keep speculation without knowing what is what means, one is living and speculating within Layer 3 without knowing what is outside of Layer 3. See, isnt it nice to have a model as a GPS to know where one is? :D:D:D hahaha

GungFuHillbilly

01-24-2006, 12:59 PM

People I am thinking believe in all kinds of things . . . if some one wants to believe in chi or Zen or other things this is their right . . . I am only saying that many others like me do not believe in such things . . . and we have good reasons for believing as we do . . . and we are not some crazy minority . . . lol . . . and I am not about to convert to this way of thinking so any model or belief based on chi for example will not be useful for me . . . in the end what it comes down to is whether or not your view helps you attain your goals or not . . . not so much whether it is factually true.

Ghost,

There is a distinct difference between saying
1. chi should not or does not play a role in martial arts training
and saying
2. chi doesn’t exist.

The perspective you are arguing from is called ontological naturalism.

You say that you don’t mean to demean other views however in the very language that you use you are demonstrating your prejudice.

“and we have good reasons for believing as we do”

I am certain that you do have “good reasons,” however you should understand that different fields of knowledge have different criteria by which to judge truth-values.

You assume a superiority of scientific knowledge by relegating other’s knowledge to mere belief. (As if we are talking about Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny.)

Understanding chi does not require “conversion” to a perspective. It merely requires tacit knowledge, experience, and communal verification. If you do not have this tacit knowledge and have not had this experience then you are expressing an ignorant (in the true sense of the word) perspective to deny its existence.

“. . . but how can we say it is chi and not natural process of body that has nothing to do with mysterious energy . . . I am thinking that if people want to believe in chi they can find reasons to believe in it . . . this is human nature . . . science asks can you prove it to even those who do not want to believe . . . so that there is no denying it.”

Chi IS a natural process of the body (according to the Ayurveda and TCM view), it is your assumption that it is not; particularly in referring to it as “mysterious.”

“…there is no denying it”

Denying from whose/which perspective? Again you are elevating scientific knowledge to be ‘more valid’ than any other field of knowledge (i.e., aesthetic, spiritual, etc.).

Are you saying then that people cannot deny the views of science??? Even among scientists it is very rare to find total agreement.

It’s one thing to say you respect others' views in theory, it’s quite another to practice it.

-GFH

anerlich

01-24-2006, 04:20 PM

"Science" is a body of knowledge, but also an attitude and system of inquiry about the world.

Pure scientific enquiry does not have agenda. It accepts evidence to support theories and phenomena. Quantum mechanics is far more wonderful, esoteric and convoluted than any of the stuff being discussed here, even by those who insist on grandiosity and deliberate obfuscation.

While there is benefit to non-scientific, and indeed, occasionally irrational practices related to chi, youga, acupuncture, etc., the lack of rigour means that they are far more open to wholesale abuse, fanciful claims, etc. Anyone who doesn't have their sceptics radar up going into this is a fool.

AS Rene said on here recently, quoting a Sifu he knew (I paraphrase), "If all that stuff were true, China would win every event in every Olympics".

AmanuJRY

01-24-2006, 04:44 PM

People I am thinking believe in all kinds of things...

Yup...the Earth is flat, the world is balanced on the back of a turtle, the holocaust never happened, columbus was the 'first' to discover the 'new world', little green men, there's an alien 'base' on the dark side of the moon, we decended from monkeys, we're the only intelligent life in the universe...oh, and one of my recent favorites, hurricane Katrina was man made to wipe out (or thin) the poor black population of the southern states.

Belief in an unusual form of energy manipulation (which has much scientific support in the form of bio-feedback and quantum mechanics) doesn't seem so outrageous now, does it?

if some one wants to believe in chi or Zen or other things this is their right . . . I am only saying that many others like me do not believe in such things . . . and we have good reasons for believing as we do...

Then state them. (a new thread perhaps)

and we are not some crazy minority . . .

You may be suprised. Show some stats on that.

[/QUOTE] . . and I am not about to convert to this way of thinking so any model or belief based on chi for example will not be useful for me...[/QUOTE]

Probably not.

. . . and I tell you that I do not give personal information about myself over internet . . .

As far as I'm concerned, giving one's true name isn't giving away too much 'personal information', unless, of course, you are a troll. Besides, I give much more credit to those who are 'known' than those who post anonymously with a screen name.

You're right though who you are, is probably of no real relevence.

Hendrik

01-24-2006, 06:50 PM

as a last post for this topic.

i would like to say thank you to you all where i learn alots from you all disregard of if we are different.

wishing the best to you all.

think positive thoughts,
and as st. padre pio said---
pray, hope, and dont worry

imho,
pray - layer 4 surrender and recieve support state
hope - layer 3 gain energy state
worry - layer 3 draining energy state, so dont do it.

that is a great use of our energy and resources to get the best outcome. praise the spring!

good bye for now.

ghostofwingchun

01-24-2006, 09:04 PM

Yup...the Earth is flat, the world is balanced on the back of a turtle, the holocaust never happened, columbus was the 'first' to discover the 'new world', little green men, there's an alien 'base' on the dark side of the moon, we decended from monkeys, we're the only intelligent life in the universe...oh, and one of my recent favorites, hurricane Katrina was man made to wipe out (or thin) the poor black population of the southern states.

Belief in an unusual form of energy manipulation (which has much scientific support in the form of bio-feedback and quantum mechanics) doesn't seem so outrageous now, does it?

Then state them. (a new thread perhaps)

You may be suprised. Show some stats on that.

. . and I am not about to convert to this way of thinking so any model or belief based on chi for example will not be useful for me...

Probably not.

As far as I'm concerned, giving one's true name isn't giving away too much 'personal information', unless, of course, you are a troll. Besides, I give much more credit to those who are 'known' than those who post anonymously with a screen name.

You're right though who you are, is probably of no real relevence.

If people want to believe this or that I do not stand in their way . . . I am merely saying that this sort of view is not for me since I do not look at world in this manner . . . and I am thinking that my view is not unique to me. I am also thinking that just because some one has different view or opinion there is no need for anger or getting personal or animosity . . . I praise Mr Hendrik for coming up with interesting and though provoking model . . . if this model is helpful to others this is great . . . not all models are for all people . . . and some people like me may not need models at all . . . I offer my views which are different as counter point . . . but please do not take this seriously . . . models and conversations will not convince any one or convert any one or prove anything . . . all we can do is share our views . . . and hope to learn more about other views . . . and maybe about our own views. Mr Hendrik is has positive approach to sharing views . . . he does not snipe or say negative things . . . he is to be applauded for this I am thinking . . . and perhaps it give pause for all of us.

Thanks,

Ghost

sihing

01-24-2006, 09:25 PM

If people want to believe this or that I do not stand in their way . . . I am merely saying that this sort of view is not for me since I do not look at world in this manner . . . and I am thinking that my view is not unique to me. I am also thinking that just because some one has different view or opinion there is no need for anger or getting personal or animosity . . . I praise Mr Hendrik for coming up with interesting and though provoking model . . . if this model is helpful to others this is great . . . not all models are for all people . . . and some people like me may not need models at all . . . I offer my views which are different as counter point . . . but please do not take this seriously . . . models and conversations will not convince any one or convert any one or prove anything . . . all we can do is share our views . . . and hope to learn more about other views . . . and maybe about our own views. Mr Hendrik is has positive approach to sharing views . . . he does not snipe or say negative things . . . he is to be applauded for this I am thinking . . . and perhaps it give pause for all of us.

Thanks,

Ghost

Your a funny man Ghost....Sounds like a little closed minded too, but that is okay, because you are free to believe what you want and to neglect anything that is not of your way of thinking...peace and tranquility to you my friend:)

Concerning your comment "but please do not take this seriously . . . models and conversations will not convince any one or convert any one or prove anything . . . all we can do is share our views . . . and hope to learn more about other views . . . and maybe about our own views.", why think this way if anothers experience means nothing if you have to in the end discover it yourself to really know about the thing you want to know about?? LOL. Sounds confusing doesn't it. Why even contribute on a forum like this if another opinions are relatively pointlesss to you...:D

James

P.S. I actually agree with your comment, on this forum all we have here are our views and opinions (your fact is theory to me and visa versa..)

GungFuHillbilly

01-25-2006, 07:24 AM

and I am thinking that my view is not unique to me.

Just because others share your views does not give them any more weight or validity. It merely fulfills the need for people to feel that they are not alone.

I am also thinking that just because some one has different view or opinion there is no need for anger or getting personal or animosity . . .

It is very interesting to me that when you offer a dissenting opinion it is ‘counterpoint,’:) however when someone disagrees with you it is a personal angry attack. :mad:

I have seen no ad hominem arguments made in this thread…:confused:

I offer my views which are different as counter point . . . but please do not take this seriously . . .

So if I understand you correctly, then no one should take you seriously? Please explain…

models and conversations will not convince any one or convert any one or prove anything . . . all we can do is share our views . . . and hope to learn more about other views . . . and maybe about our own views.

How can someone learn if the issues and questions raised about your perspective is never addressed. There is a distinction to be made between defending one’s position and clarifying it.

IMO, if you are not strong enough to be able to take criticism and are not prepared to answer questions regarding your opinions then you really shouldn’t share.

This is analogous to martial arts training in that as soon as some people get hit they don’t want to train anymore... (Even the most ardent of people who argue against sparring would not go so far as to say that in training you shouldn't/don’t get hit now and again.)

If this is the case then perhaps the person needs to take Justin’s advice and go study Yoga.

Mr Hendrik is has positive approach to sharing views . . . he does not snipe or say negative things . . . he is to be applauded for this I am thinking . . . and perhaps it give pause for all of us.

If by a positive approach you mean the ability to completely dodge criticism then I would agree.

IMO it is you Ghost who are taking things too seriously. It just seems to me that you are attempting to hold a position that you have no evidence for (which directly goes against what you purport to believe).

Remember, a scientist is supposed to have an open mind and when issues are raised you address them, not run from them and claim that everyone is being ‘negative.’

We are martial artists, not saints. :D

I am reminded of the old saying… ‘If you can’t stand the heat, then stay out of the kitchen.’

-GFH

BTW, I have no problems with sharing who I am. It’s just that most of you don’t know me anyway. But my name is Stephen Morton and I’m in Northwest Arkansas. Peace y’all!