Using "qi" to break vs. physics (video)

[wenshu]

It was an interesting word choice, but not mine, lol. It's in the video description posted by the uploader.

Haha, sorry LFJ, I was trying to make it clear that I could see that by nesting the quotes. But yeah, I knew it wasn't your gaffe.

[IronFist]

If you go to a college level political science class, you should not expect the definition of conservative or liberal to match the popular definition, because one is instructive, one is utilitarian, and the two uses have little common ground.

Now, a person may BE a true conservative in ways AND believe in aspects of the popular definition that may seem counter to that, this is a case of what they are versus what they believe, and it does not necessarily make them liars or frauds, merely contradictory as any other human.

Breaking works when it fulfills the classical definition of chi, regardless of what other beliefs the practitioners doing it ascribe to it. If they are not guiding a mystical energy to the hand, but the belief enables them to strike without unnecessary concern, then the belief is useful, utilitarian, one could even suggest expedient means. If they actually believe it, they cannot be termed a fraud, as that entails knowledge they may not have. If it is useful, then it cannot be termed a harm of any serious merit, either.

There is a difference between belief and fraud, and I find people who erase that line to be telling a falsehood for their own goals, which is not different than fraud.

As for wanting to fulfill the definition you state, it is not a Chinese definition, and so it is helpful to point that out, since that is the central topic. If more people knew the proper definition, less people would claim much about it.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, but it sounds like you're saying "qi is real, but it doesn't mean mystic energy, it just means breathing and consciousness."

So if that's the case, then all these Shaolin Monk demonstrations are fraudulent because it's not possible to breathe in your arm to make it hard like steel.

I can understand the original definition of "qi." Hundreds or thousands of years ago before anyone knew much about science, I could see people assigning a concept to "life force." X is alive, it has qi. Y is not alive, it doesn't have qi. When you eat something, you're absorbing its qi and its qi is becoming part of you (which is actually pretty correct with regard to molecular breakdown and how your body absorbs food).

I won't even argue against that definition because it's fine.

But people extend the definition of qi further into a tangible energy that can be moved around and used to "make the body as hard as steel," and that's what I'm either calling BS or or asking for proof of, because every "demonstration" of this I've seen has been the result of physical conditioning and physics (which may or may not include parlor tricks), and has nothing to do with moving energy around or qi (outside of the fact that the practitioner was alive and breathing and conscious during the demo, obviously). But it appears they want to fool the public into believing they have some sort of special power, and that is what makes the martial arts look bad.

But really, saying "well he was breathing and therefore he was using qi" doesn't disprove what I'm saying. Everyone in this thread knows exactly what I'm talking about, and that includes you.

[IronFist]

Maybe it's just me, but I feel like these discussions always end up as semantic arguments.

Yeah, a few people in this thread have already started to do that. Hopefully I clarified in the post above this one.

[Taixuquan99]

Are you serious with this?

Absolutely.

I guess all power lifters are qigong masters, too, since they eat food which becomes muscle which makes them able to lift a lot of weight. And focusing their intent on lifting the weights when they're in the gym is another demonstration of their incredible qi power.

Not all, but, by the classical definition, those who are healthier for it, do it for the optimum health, eat healthy, and did other things to address other aspects of health and fitness that weights don't, would be healthy, and thus, have good chi. In performance, it might be limited to their specialty, but that would always be true no matter the specialty.

Get outta here with this

No.

If this is the case, then it must suck to do CMA where you have to spend hours "training your qi" when every other athlete in the world does it subconsciously without even trying and without special qi development exercises.

This is false in many ways.

First, because of the obsession in China with cultivation, it is true that many simple things get stretched out into endless regimens merely to maintain one teacher's authority. However, it is not universally the case, nor does it mean the many of the regimens do not have a core that, if allowed to, would rapidly convey expertise.

Second, most martial qigong relates closely to the way key techniques in the style play out, in exactly the way practicing swinging a bat relates to hitting in the batting cage or at the plate, or practicing a tennis swing, or any of the myriad or techniques in almost any other sport fill the same roll. A good batter does not become so subconsciously, sorry, you're pulling that out of your arse.

Third, many of those techniques are quite practical in their historical context, which may include such things as war and famine and repression. To train like a modern athlete in a time of famine, simply in order to maintain martial skill, would be suicide.

I think you are under the false idea that you know what you are talking about because a kung fu teacher said it. As I stated, martial artists aren't the most educated lot in any society.

[wenshu]

Are you serious with this?

I guess all power lifters are qigong masters, too, since they eat food which becomes muscle which makes them able to lift a lot of weight. And focusing their intent on lifting the weights when they're in the gym is another demonstration of their incredible qi power.

If this is the case, then it must suck to do CMA where you have to spend hours "training your qi" when every other athlete in the world does it subconsciously without even trying and without special qi development exercises.

Q to the E to the mutherfucking D.

This is exactly the case. There is nothing mystical about it.

[wenshu]

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, but it sounds like you're saying "qi is real, but it doesn't mean mystic energy, it just means breathing and consciousness."

So if that's the case, then all these Shaolin Monk demonstrations are fraudulent because it's not possible to breathe in your arm to make it hard like steel.

I can understand the original definition of "qi." Hundreds or thousands of years ago before anyone knew much about science, I could see people assigning a concept to "life force." X is alive, it has qi. Y is not alive, it doesn't have qi. When you eat something, you're absorbing its qi and its qi is becoming part of you (which is actually pretty correct with regard to molecular breakdown and how your body absorbs food).

I won't even argue against that definition because it's fine.

But people extend the definition of qi further into a tangible energy that can be moved around and used to "make the body as hard as steel," and that's what I'm either calling BS or or asking for proof of, because every "demonstration" of this I've seen has been the result of physical conditioning and physics (which may or may not include parlor tricks), and has nothing to do with moving energy around or qi (outside of the fact that the practitioner was alive and breathing and conscious during the demo, obviously). But it appears they want to fool the public into believing they have some sort of special power, and that is what makes the martial arts look bad.

But really, saying "well he was breathing and therefore he was using qi" doesn't disprove what I'm saying. Everyone in this thread knows exactly what I'm talking about, and that includes you.

Just to play devil's advocate but modern science has no consensual agreement on the definition of "life" in the first place.

[md1]

Breaking is really as simple as can you hit with more force than the Chosen material can withstand. Does anyone really feel that there is some mystical power that is breaking the stuff? Idk... not me. Physics plain and simple.

You can do all the chi gong you want but if you hit like a little kid you're not breaking anything but your hand.

[Taixuquan99]

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, but it sounds like you're saying "qi is real, but it doesn't mean mystic energy, it just means breathing and consciousness."

Please point to where I say either of these. I respond to someone who equates one with the other by refuting it. I have been clear in saying that I am discussing the scholar's definition of chi for the last two millennium, and that the description, aside from lacking knowledge of biochemistry to explain the way energy is obtained from food, is often neither used to convey mystical powers nor at odds with much of what we still experience as normal body functioning.

So if that's the case, then all these Shaolin Monk demonstrations are fraudulent because it's not possible to breathe in your arm to make it hard like steel.

That's a terrible argument. First, it's apparently based on something I didn't assert. Second, it makes no sense from even that straw man. Third, I suspect it equates some common analogies used in qi gong erroneously. I am assuming that it refers to the idea that, if in a tight spot, inhaling can often release the pressure, but this is a case of inhaling changing the shoulder placement subtly, which can then free a limb. I'm only guessing that's what you're getting at, because your question is not clear.

I can understand the original definition of "qi." Hundreds or thousands of years ago before anyone knew much about science, I could see people assigning a concept to "life force."

Your second sentence there disproves your first. No authority on the subject would pass a paper based on your analysis, because it is based on what you heard from some dude online.

X is alive, it has qi. Y is not alive, it doesn't have qi.

Ack

When you eat something, you're absorbing its qi and its qi is becoming part of you (which is actually pretty correct with regard to molecular breakdown and how your body absorbs food).

And the quality of that food relates to the ability to feel healthy, which is also apt.

I won't even argue against that definition because it's fine.

It's about the only definition. Just because you find a guy on youtube who differs doesn't change that, nor does it give much credence to making others prove his statement, or disagreeing with a guy who essentially is also disagreeing with the youtube explanation, but not agreeing with you enough, apparently. Despite the fact that you have no particular actual knowledge of the classical topic.

But people extend the definition of qi further into a tangible energy that can be moved around and used to "make the body as hard as steel," and that's what I'm either calling BS or or asking for proof of, because every "demonstration" of this I've seen has been the result of physical conditioning and physics (which may or may not include parlor tricks), and has nothing to do with moving energy around or qi (outside of the fact that the practitioner was alive and breathing and conscious during the demo, obviously). But it appears they want to fool the public into believing they have some sort of special power, and that is what makes the martial arts look bad.

If they believe it, and many do, they are not frauds. That's a dishonest distinction. And, if it allows the break, even if not for the reasons they think, then it is not a bad practice. You are making a dishonest statement and then chiding others for dishonesty.

But really, saying "well he was breathing and therefore he was using qi" doesn't disprove what I'm saying.

It's funny how often I have to answer things I never said just because I think you set up a bit of a straw man expecting everybody to prove one guy's statements when most don't necessarily share that view, even when having the same practice.

Everyone in this thread knows exactly what I'm talking about, and that includes you.

I'd say we don't, because you think we're talking about frauds, and I think you're talking about frauds and the misinformed and those who simply do some breaking and iron hand and don't ascribe anything supernatural to it, but avoiding the latter two because it doesn't mean you get to be the heroic online fraud fighter saving kung fu, sorry.

As I said, fighting frauds is a fraud's game, I just like to train, and I have never seen the great fraud fighter manage to do anything useful by their efforts, except avoid reality so that things can be black and white, which is fraud. The reality is, all kung fu schools do some iron hand, a much smaller number do demos of it. This is the opposite of the situation you seem to be describing, and yet you know it's true.

And you're arguing with someone who disagrees with what you disagree with, but is smart enough to do so based on classical usage of the term that is still the accepted definition, whereas you use a guy on youtube.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I think that, if someone is saying that QI is a mystical "force-like" thing that can be cultivated and harnessed and used much like a Jedi would, then they are full of it and are trying to sell you something AND have no notion of what QI meant to those that originated the term.

IF, on the other hand, the person is using the term "QI" as a term that designates perfect physical/mental union, then that is something else.
IF the person is saying that in ancient times, with their lack of the complete picture of how things worked that they would attribute certain"out of the ordinary" skills to QI, then that is fine too.

[IronFist]

Just to play devil's advocate but modern science has no consensual agreement on the definition of "life" in the first place.

Yeah I know, but it understands how energy is absorbed from the food we eat. I was just saying that I understand how man in the past may have associated qi with life, or breath, or life energy (eg. that which the living has and that which is dead does not have), or any combination of those.

That's fine. Under that example, breathing is qi, eating is bringing in qi, sure, I fully agree.

What our friend Taixuquan99 doesn't seem to be able to elaborate on is:

1) how is this life force/breathing/living energy qi moved around in the body to make parts of the body "as hard as steel"?

2) or, if that is an incorrect definition of qi (because qi simply means living energy and is not something tangible that can be moved around in the body to make the body "as hard as steel,"), why all these nutso, frauds, and charlatans continue to describe it as such?

There is a bunch of semantic side stepping going on in here (which tends to be a defensive argument strategy; you're disproving me, therefore I will change the definition of the words you use, therefore I'm no longer disproved).

So I'll make this real easy:

@Taixuquan99:

1) do you believe that qi, in any of its definitions, can be "moved around in the body" and used to "make the body as hard as steel?"

2) do you believe that qi, in any of its definitions, plays a role in protecting the body from damage beyond what is done by physical conditioning and physics in these breaks/demos? (by saying "yes" to this, you are basically saying "those bricks would not have broken if he just hit them without first moving the qi into his hand")

3) do you believe it is possible to perform demos using only qi and not physical conditioning, such as taking a sledge hammer blow to the stomach without flexing the abs (being protected only by qi)?

4) do you believe the Shaolin Monks in the video in the first post were being deceptive when they attributed their parlor tricks to being able to "direct the qi to a particular part of the body" to "make it as hard as steel?"

Seriously, enough of these semantic games.

"well, that depends on what your definition of 'is' is"

[md1]

I think that, if someone is saying that QI is a mystical "force-like" thing that can be cultivated and harnessed and used much like a Jedi would, then they are full of it and are trying to sell you something AND have no notion of what QI meant to those that originated the term.

IF, on the other hand, the person is using the term "QI" as a term that designates perfect physical/mental union, then that is something else.
IF the person is saying that in ancient times, with their lack of the complete picture of how things worked that they would attribute certain"out of the ordinary" skills to QI, then that is fine too.

Exactly!!

Don't forget the world was Flat once! lol

[sanjuro_ronin]

Exactly!!

Don't forget the world was Flat once! lol

Indeed.
The other thing we need to realize is that, when what a "qi master" does is done by someone with NO "qi training" whatsoever, what does that tell us?
That either "qi training" was not needed OR that "qi training" is far more universal than we think it is and that SOME people want people to believe it is.

[IronFist]

If they believe it, and many do, they are not frauds. That's a dishonest distinction. And, if it allows the break, even if not for the reasons they think, then it is not a bad practice. You are making a dishonest statement and then chiding others for dishonesty.

Let me make sure I understand you.

Are you saying that if people believe they are using mystical energy to do their breaks, even if they are not actually using it, but if they believe they are, then it's not a bad practice?

Well that raises an interesting point.

I could take someone with no training and get them to replicate some of what the monks did within a few minutes (breaking bricks on a step, kicking the vertical concrete slabs above the midpoint and into a corner). These tricks involve very little conditioning, and definitely no directing or moving mystical energy around in the body.

Some of the other stuff does require physical conditioning. For example, the forearm breaks, even tho they are basically parlor tricks (the stick breaks because of inertia and where it was hit, not because there is qi in the guy's arm making it "as hard as steel"), requires conditioning, because getting hit in an unconditioned forearm hurts!

So let's say I take Joe Schmoe off the street and teach him to do those breaks.

If I add a qigong component and cause him to believe that it is necessary to do the breaks (eg. "hey Joe Schmoe, you are using your qi to do these breaks, and you have to imagine qi moving from your dan tian into your foot before you kick this concrete slab or it won't work"), wouldn't that make me kind of a crack pot teacher?

So then Joe Schmoe posts a video online of his "qi power breaks."

I suppose in this case, he is not being deliberately misleading, since he actually believes the qigong component is necessary to do the breaks.

So I guess technically I couldn't label Joe Schmoe as a fraud in this case, since he's not intentionally defrauding anyone.

So if that's what you meant, then I agree with you.


On the other hand, if these performers know it's bunk and are just trying to make the general public believe they have special powers (ego???), then that is most certainly fraud.

Hopefully this clarifies.

[teetsao]

here is a pretty good demo f qi manipulation

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Fc0bI5CPuk

[IronFist]

And on a related note, even if mystic power can be moved around in the body and can make your body "as hard as steel," (which I have not ever seen a demonstration of, but would not entirely discredit since I don't claim to know everything), if it cannot be done near instantly, I don't see the benefit for fighting. What are you going to say, "hold on, opponent, I see that you can kick very hard. Give me 10 seconds to move my qi around so that I am ready to take your kick to my stomach," or "hold on, dude, I can crack your skull with a single blow, but I need 10 seconds to move my arms around first and get my qi flowing into my palm in order to do so, so please stay bent over until I am ready"?

In that case, it would still be cool for demos, and very cool as far as unlocking the secrets of the human body goes, but it would still be useless for fighting.

I believe all the breaks we've seen in this thread, and every break and iron body demo I've seen in my entire life, has been the result of physical conditioning and physics, and had nothing to do with moving energy around to make the body "as hard as steel." I believe the warm ups, the moving the hands around (to "direct the qi" or whatever), the preparation and breathing, is to get the practitioner mentally ready, and in that regard is a necessary component. Watch a power lifter before he makes a lift. He'll take a moment to "get in the zone." It helps. It has nothing to do with qi, it's just a little ritual to prepare oneself. Clear the mind. Visual the break (or the lift, or whatever you're about to do). Studies have shown that thinking about doing something fires the same neurons in the brain as actually doing it, thus it yields increased neurological efficiency. The iron palm guys who perform the motion slowly a few times before actually breaking the brick are doing the same thing. This is legit and helpful, but they're not moving their qi around; they're just getting their head in the game.

Cliffs Notes:

a) getting your head in the game - yes
b) physical conditioning - yes
c) mental preparation - yes
d) proper physics and body mechanics - yes
e) confidence - yes
f) moving energy around in the body to make it "as hard as steel" - no

Now, wait for people to come say that A through E are qi, and therefore these breaks are using qi