Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 26 of 26

Thread: Chi?

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,519
    As silly as it might sound to some, Chi or qi really does exist. Not in the manner most try to reflect, but it does exist. It is an energy that flows from our core, around the naval, and outward to all the extremities, including the head, and back again. It follows roughly the flow of our blood, but not completely or exactly. More like it follows your nervous system. Modern western medicine is based in facts that can be scientifically proven, which says a lot for it. However, western science can not find itself even getting involved in traditional Chinese medicine. A good example is accupuncture. Accupuncture has not been well recieved by western medicine. I remember about 20 years ago now a team of cordiologists went to China to study a new heart surgery technique where the heart was not stopped during a valve replacement. The young western cardiologists were not so excited about the surgical procedure so much as they were excited by the method of anesthesia, which was accupuncture, and the patient, a woman, was fully conscious during the entire proceedure. But even with witnessing that accupuncture is still considered hockus pockus to most western doctors.
    Accupuncture would not be possible if not for chi flow, and I think that is an honest effort were to be made, science would be astonished. However, chi is a nature thing that we can not truely control. We can nurture it in ways, but we can not envoke it or send it out of our being. It is just a part of you like your blood. Discussing it on this forum is not really going to prove or disprove anything, as there is going to be as many different opinions as there are responses to it.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Northridge, CA
    Posts
    601
    With this thinking, ideas don't exist.
    The generation of ideas by a human being is a scientifically verifiable process.


    Science has no place in the subject of qi
    Science has a place in all things. Science is simply a means to understand. If understanding has no place in the subject of Qi, then you've got a very serious issue, because understanding and science also has no place in Cults, Mcdojos, Palm Readers and the like.


    It has no place in the subject of meaning, philosophy.
    Actually it has a very secure place among meaning and philosophy. Its incredibly ridiculous to assume otherwise.


    he best it can describe is the mechanism of a thing, but not the reason.
    Your statement makes no sense. You don't even define what "Reason" you're talking about. Science defines millions of reasons.


    Explain how science was required for logic, when the scientific method itself uses logic.
    WOW! I can't even have a legitimate intellectual discussion with you. This statement showcased such an incredible display of ignorance I am literally not even going to read the rest of your response. I'm going to stop right now and just say this - I never said science was required for anything - In fact I said specifically "we don't NEED science to explain to us why we can...".

    I'll make this really simple for you - Logic does not require science. However, any development and understanding of the logic we inherantly possess, is in itself, science.

    Go back to school, and then you have my permission to re-read my post and respond.



    lol taai gihk yahn, indeed. I just keep rolling that boulder up a hill, its because I'm especially bored tonight
    Last edited by AdrianK; 04-16-2009 at 08:42 PM.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    The house of God
    Posts
    373
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chiang Po View Post
    As silly as it might sound to some, Chi or qi really does exist.
    I only still interact with reductionists with conflicting views within themselves on this issue to find out just how far some of them will go and to know who to avoid talking to in the future.

  4. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by AdrianK View Post
    lol taai gihk yahn, indeed. I just keep rolling that boulder up a hill, its because I'm especially bored tonight
    to paraphrase Camu, "One must imagine Adrian happy."

  5. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by RonH View Post
    I'll tell you what. On this point, when you read up on NOMA, then we can return to this point. But, I'm gonna bet you don't know it without looking it up first.
    he should get over himself already, as if he is the only person in the world who has read Gould (he is also not the only person to misunderstand and misappropriate him, but that's to be expected; SJG would be ROTFLHAO if he read what this guy posts);

    it's funny, people of this guys ilk: they decry science as being inadequate to the task of encompassing something like "qi", but are the first to run an appeal to scientific authority strategy when they find something that they think supports their belief system; same as those Kapra-lovers, who are look down their noses at the vast limitations of "science", but will jump all over quantum mechanics theory as "proof" of "qi" and the like (without, of course, having any actual clue as to what quantum mechanics theory is, what it proposes, how it states that things work on the quantum level, etc.)

    Quote Originally Posted by RonH View Post
    I only still interact with reductionists with conflicting views within themselves on this issue to find out just how far some of them will go and to know who to avoid talking to in the future.
    this guy is such a condescending pr1ck: and he is the who claims he dispenses "healing energy" throughout the world over the internet, LOL; this guy has no clue about what healing is in the slightest
    Last edited by taai gihk yahn; 04-17-2009 at 05:38 AM.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky
    Posts
    1,113
    Quote Originally Posted by taai gihk yahn View Post
    "qi" is a metaphor, albeit one that encompasses a variety of phenomena;

    the character for "qi" was originally a pictogram depicting vapor rising off of fermenting rise; as such, the concept was firmly grounded in observable phenomenon; in TCM it generally correlates with a variety of relatively objective physiological processes that are clearly described and understood using contemporary knowledge paradigms; it was / is utilized to describe those physiological functions that were at one point observable only at a macro level; in some cases it was a discreet function that we would recognize today, such as respiration; in other cases, it was the net function of what we would refer to as a physiological system, such as digestion; in other cases, it referred to what would at present be defined as relating to a psychological state, be it a primary organic (e.g. - schizophrenia) or environment based (e.e.g - PTSD); of course, "ancient" Chinese culture included ideas about spirits, demons, etc., as well as a variety of other fantastical stories, so"qi" got tied up into some of this stuff as well, such as Taoist Immortals riding around on purple clouds...

    the idea of "rhythm" permeates the metaphor of "qi": that is, a fundamental concept is periodicity, which is part of what gives the construct a great deal of predictive and prognostic power in context of medicine: basically by observing various rhythms in the body, one can become adept at correlating changes in one rhythm with another

    "qi" also is used to describe a variety of relatively subjective sensorial experiences, such as what one might experience during certain types of exercises that impact the sensorimotor system; these include meditation, qigong, taiji, etc.; like any other form of exercise, these practices impact the physiology in different ways; if one ones 5 miles, the physiology will change to reflect that sort of activity, and one will experience an internal state change (e.g. - "runner's high"); likewise, if one practices "100 Days Opening", one will also have a set of "internal" experiences that reflect the nature of that particular practice; specifically, one will experience changes in one's autonomic nervous system that will cause various sensations internally, such as heat, feelings of lightness or heaviness, euphoria, calmness, etc.;

    the idea of looking for "qi" as a discreet entity, as some sort of energy akin to heat, gravity, electricity, magnetism, potential / kinetic energy etc. is a fallacy; that's because the processes that "qi" describes all contain these energies to a varying extent: if we talk about the function of the human body, any time you describe any physiological process, you involves all of these forces; "qi" is a the unifying descriptor; that includes emotional / psychological function as well;

    saying that "qi" cannot be described by / doesn't need "science" is an extremely narrow-minded perspective; the bod is the body; the universe is the universe; different people / cultures have described it in different ways, but we are all looking at the same thing; the difference is one o approach: so-called "eastern" culture, to some extent, looks at the macro in order to understand the micro (relatively speaking); so-called "western" culture looks at things in a reductionist way, trying to understand things at their "smallest" in order to then understand the whole; meaning, that, both are "holistic", just coming at it differently; I find it interesting how people are so quick to point out the "limitations" of science, and talk about how the Chinese really understood the "internal" workings of things so much better: well, the Chinese didn't know about cellular function, DNA, atomic theory, sub-atomic particles, etc.; certainly, their perspective might have inferred it, but if anything, current "science" has looked at the "internal" much more deeply than any one else has done, ever; strange then, that this "mysterious energy" manages to evade objective detection, but exists very abundantly from a subjective perspective, usually amongst people who do not posses the knowledge to correlate what they feel with current understanding of physiology...

    "qi" was what was used when the technological limitations got in the way of specific observation at a level smaller than what was observable with the human senses at the time; it described a gestalt effect with the main purpose of having predictive / prognostic value in medicine, but also as a means of talking about the interrelated nature of all things, something that has been a commonly discussed idea throughout the history of mankind, but every different culture, in lots of different ways; so nothing unique there - it's all in context of how we as humans experience the universe within which we "exist"
    Very well said....if they can't understand this they will never get it. I'm impressed.
    BQ

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky
    Posts
    1,113
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chiang Po View Post
    As silly as it might sound to some, Chi or qi really does exist. Not in the manner most try to reflect, but it does exist. It is an energy that flows from our core, around the naval, and outward to all the extremities, including the head, and back again. It follows roughly the flow of our blood, but not completely or exactly. More like it follows your nervous system. Modern western medicine is based in facts that can be scientifically proven, which says a lot for it. However, western science can not find itself even getting involved in traditional Chinese medicine. A good example is accupuncture. Accupuncture has not been well recieved by western medicine. I remember about 20 years ago now a team of cordiologists went to China to study a new heart surgery technique where the heart was not stopped during a valve replacement. The young western cardiologists were not so excited about the surgical procedure so much as they were excited by the method of anesthesia, which was accupuncture, and the patient, a woman, was fully conscious during the entire proceedure. But even with witnessing that accupuncture is still considered hockus pockus to most western doctors.
    Accupuncture would not be possible if not for chi flow, and I think that is an honest effort were to be made, science would be astonished. However, chi is a nature thing that we can not truely control. We can nurture it in ways, but we can not envoke it or send it out of our being. It is just a part of you like your blood. Discussing it on this forum is not really going to prove or disprove anything, as there is going to be as many different opinions as there are responses to it.
    Also well said......I feel explanations for Chi will eventually (if ever) come from Quantum physics.....just my opinion for what thats worth.
    BQ

  8. #23
    What is being said here is common from what I hear.

    people want a western explanation for an eastern idea/practice.

    kinda like comparing apples to oranges and also one of the reasons that westerners tend to look down on things like Qi and acupuncture.

    where acupuncture has thousands of years of use and results to back it up a western viewer would say that all those years don't count becuase it wasn't evaluated unsing new things like a double blind studies.

    There is a reason that china uses western and eastern medicine side by side in their hospitals today.

    I have a family memeber who is finishing her western med school this summer and as part of her degree she was introduced eastern medicine in a weekend seminar. THis created a ton of confusion for her because you simply cannot grasp TCM in a few days, especially never being exposed to it.

    So in this manner I don't think it is right for you to deny the existence of chi with out considerable research and experience.

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Canada!
    Posts
    23,110
    Quote Originally Posted by BrokenTitanium View Post
    I will probably get hammered on this question but oh well here it goes. is possible that Chi in general is referring to the oxygen that is carried in our blood? Thanks!
    qi=breath. it is more than just the element oxygen. oxygen is one of the smallest amounts of element that we breath. Most of our breath intake is actually nitrogen.

    Here nor there.

    qi, is not just one thing. It is your elan vidal, your life force and it is many things working together to maintain your sentience.

    without qi, you are a dead husk, so it is qi that is all the things that normally animate that husk that is your vessel of containment for your life force.

    when it's(qi) gone, so are you.
    Kung Fu is good for you.

  10. #25
    I will probably get hammered on this question but oh well here it goes. is possible that Chi in general is referring to the oxygen that is carried in our blood? Thanks!
    I would think that the answer would be yes simple because in the spiritual sense of the term as you have no doubt heard it described even in general it would not be limited to just the oxygen. I thought it was a valid question by the way.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    South FL. Which is not to be confused with any part of the USA
    Posts
    9,302
    didn't read all this but someone up thread wanted to liken chi to electricity and someone else said that you could 'see' electricity

    I just want to point out that electricity is basically invisible...you can't see the electrons moving with the naked eye but you can see the effect it has on things it passes through...the light from the bulb is NOT electricity

    it may be that we just haven't advanced science enough to come up with a tool that enables us to 'see' qi
    "George never did wake up. And, even all that talking didn't make death any easier...at least not for us. Maybe, in the end, all you can really hope for is that your last thought is a nice one...even if it's just about the taste of a nice cold beer."

    "If you find the right balance between desperation and fear you can make people believe anything"

    "Is enlightenment even possible? Or, did I drive by it like a missed exit?"

    It's simpler than you think.

    I could be completely wrong"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •