Ki is a hoax

[Flying Crane]

Interesting bit of reading here:

http://www.qigonginstitute.org/html/Qi_Press/TaiChi Stanford.pdf

The individual in the article, Chen Xiang, is a senior student under Feng Zhiqiang in Beijing, who is also my sifu's teacher.

It doesn't answer any real questions about Qi, but it makes it clear that the researchers were very interested in his capabilities and didn't find it entirely easy to explain.

 

[exile]

Interesting bit of reading here:

http://www.qigonginstitute.org/html/Qi_Press/TaiChi Stanford.pdf

The individual in the article, Chen Xiang, is a senior student under Feng Zhiqiang in Beijing, who is also my sifu's teacher.

It doesn't answer any real questions about Qi, but it makes it clear that the researchers were very interested in his capabilities and didn't find it entirely easy to explain.

They do the same kind of stuff at OSU with phenomenally gifted athletes in several disciplines—track and field, football and so on. They have unbelievably advanced scanning and simulation technology here (big surprise, eh?) and one of the most advanced sport physiology labs in the world, probably. The thing is, extraordinary athletes all perform at what look like the extreme limits of possible action. The folks at the Stanford lab don't sound as though they're looking at some external force, or source or anything like that. They are just trying to see what particular combination of factors enables off-the-charts performances like that... and given time, they'll find them, just as our computational physiologists do here with athletic prodigies.

I'm glad you brought up this kind of example, because it raises an issue that seems to me entirely parallel. Srinivasa Ramanujan was an Indian mathematician, an amateur, who had a gift for computing surrealistically difficult integrals to yield analytic solutions that most mathematicians would take one look at and say, time for a numerical approximation, there's no way you can figure out a simple algebraic solution for something like that. The story is here, if you're interested. He was taken under the wing of the great English mathematician Hardy, encouraged and ultimately vindicated in his most daring work. No one has come close to Ramanujan in this regard except may for John von Neumann. Do we have reason to assume that there is some particular quality xhu out there that we need to explain what Ramanujan did, defying as it seems to do normal human possibilities? Or what the great American chess player Pillsbury did in the 19th century, playing a hundred simultaneous games, winning them all, and then, a month later, able to play backwards from the final mate position any of the games he had played in the exhibition? Or the mind of Freeman Dyson, the greatest physicist never to win the Nobel Prize, who, confronted with a completely fresh problem by a colleague—is there a number which, if you write it down, take the rightmost digit making it up, and move it to the left end of the original, will yield a number exactly twice the original?—paused briefly and said, in the presence of a number of his colleagues at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, 'Of course there is, but the smallest such number is eighteen digits long', and proceeded to write that number down on the spot? Are we going to account for these seemingly supernatural abilities of the human mind by actually appealing to the supernatural, or metaphysical, and so on? When you're performing particularly well, effortlessly, flawlessly, is it because there's something 'out there' you're tapping into, some entity... or is there simply some combination of factors which every so often produces that 'state of grace' feeling that rewards every one of your movements and actions? I've had that happen to me a few times when I was a ski racer, and a few times skiing in wicked mogul fields when everyone else was crashing and burning on the 30% grade, and I was just gliding down. Was it because of some external force, or mind force, or similar bit of obfuscation? No, it was just because, for that little bit of time, I was doing everything right, without trying. Someone wants to call that ki—fine, though I don't see the need. But there wasn't anything out there that I was controlling, or working, or training. It was just me and my skis.

 

[tellner]

Flying Crane, I'm one of the skeptics. My background isn't extensive, but I've had a couple years each of Aikido and Taiji.

 

[Flying Crane]

They do the same kind of stuff at OSU with phenomenally gifted athletes in several disciplines—track and field, football and so on. They have unbelievably advanced scanning and simulation technology here (big surprise, eh?) and one of the most advanced sport physiology labs in the world, probably. The thing is, extraordinary athletes all perform at what look like the extreme limits of possible action. The folks at the Stanford lab don't sound as though they're looking at some external force, or source or anything like that. They are just trying to see what particular combination of factors enables off-the-charts performances like that... and given time, they'll find them, just as our computational physiologists do here with athletic prodigies.

I'm glad you brought up this kind of example, because it raises an issue that seems to me entirely parallel. Srinivasa Ramanujan was an Indian mathematician, an amateur, who had a gift for computing surrealistically difficult integrals to yield analytic solutions that most mathematicians would take one look at and say, time for a numerical approximation, there's no way you can figure out a simple algebraic solution for something like that. The story is here, if you're interested. He was taken under the wing of the great English mathematician Hardy, encouraged and ultimately vindicated in his most daring work. No one has come close to Ramanujan in this regard except may for John von Neumann. Do we have reason to assume that there is some particular quality xhu out there that we need to explain what Ramanujan did, defying as it seems to do normal human possibilities? Or what the great American chess player Pillsbury did in the 19th century, playing a hundred simultaneous games, winning them all, and then, a month later, able to play backwards from the final mate position any of the games he had played in the exhibition? Or the mind of Freeman Dyson, the greatest physicist never to win the Nobel Prize, who, confronted with a completely fresh problem by a colleague—is there a number which, if you write it down, take the rightmost digit making it up, and move it to the left end of the original, will yield a number exactly twice the original?—paused briefly and said, in the presence of a number of his colleagues at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, 'Of course there is, but the smallest such number is eighteen digits long', and proceeded to write that number down on the spot? Are we going to account for these seemingly supernatural abilities of the human mind by actually appealing to the supernatural, or metaphysical, and so on? When you're performing particularly well, effortlessly, flawlessly, is it because there's something 'out there' you're tapping into, some entity... or is there simply some combination of factors which every so often produces that 'state of grace' feeling that rewards every one of your movements and actions? I've had that happen to me a few times when I was a ski racer, and a few times skiing in wicked mogul fields when everyone else was crashing and burning on the 30% grade, and I was just gliding down. Was it because of some external force, or mind force, or similar bit of obfuscation? No, it was just because, for that little bit of time, I was doing everything right, without trying. Someone wants to call that ki—fine, though I don't see the need. But there wasn't anything out there that I was controlling, or working, or training. It was just me and my skis.

Interesting stories, particularly about the mathemeticians and chess masters and such. It illustrates how powerful and incompletely understood the human brain really is.

I think that the translation that many like to use for qi = energy, may be part of the problem. It may work as a direct translation, but I'm not sure it captures the true nature of the phenomenon.

Qi is often described as an energy that permeates everything in the universe. I dunno about that. What I suspect it MAY be (and this is just me speculating) is an ability to tap into a function of the brain that most people are unable to tap, or at least aren't able to do it consciously or consistently. Hence, your moments of perfection while skiing the moguls. Not something you can do every time, but for at least that one run, your were PERFECT.

I've read that most people only use some 10% or so of their brain's capacity. I don't really know what that means, exactly. Is the other 90% pure memory storage? Or are there possibly deeper reasoning and computation capabilities that most people never delve into? I don't know. But maybe what we have come to label as "Qi" is simply the ability to tap into some deeper region of the mind that is often out of reach for most people. Maybe there are some hidden "switches" in the unused portions of the brain that sort of get triggered thru the internal martial arts.

Maybe qi-gong exercises somehow bring us into reach of some deeper region of the brain, or something. Maybe the internal arts capitalize on this and enable the accomplished to use this deeper brain capability to drive their practice and their martial technique. And the result is sort of a tubo-charged performance, and "energy" driving your technique. What we call "qi".

I've always said that I believe it is subtle and tricky and not easily grasped. I don't believe that the average taiji student EVER truly grasps it, yet they all want to believe (and want to convince you) that they have from about the second week forward. Most of it is nonsense. But I think there are some who are really accomplished, and they rise to a level far above the average, and they do it thru effortlessness. This ability is what has simply become labelled as "Qi", a Chinese term that has been brought to the West and kept in use for lack of a better description.

I don't know much about Chinese culture, to be honest. And I don't know much about how Chinese culture affects how the Chinese think about and ponder things. But it seems to me that they found something that works, and they accept it and label it as "qi". It's the Western culture that is obsessive about giving everything a scientific label and description. There may yet be a Western scientific label and description to be had regarding qi, but I'm simply not convinced that it's been truly figured out yet. And I think discarding it as nonsense is short-sighted.

You commented about similar studies done on elite athletes. I think Sifu Chen from the article is in something of a category all his own, in comparison to the type of elite athletes that are probably most often tested. I am admittedly making a big supposition in saying that, because I don't really know much about who has been tested in this way. But my point is that Sifu Chen is an elite taiji man. But I'm not sure he would fit the bill of "elite athlete" when compared to sprinters, high-jumpers, pole-vaulters, hammer-throwers, skiers, weight-lifters and such. I don't believe he trains with the same kind of physicality that those others would. Granted, when he was younger I believe he trained in some external arts, Northern Shaolin or something. But now he practices his taiji, and he practices it as a viable martial art. But he spends HUGE amounts of time practicing his qi-gong, putting far more emphasis on that. Sifu has told me that Sifu Chen has (or had) a job as a night watchman somewhere. It was a quiet shift. He would spend the whole night standing around doing his qi-gong exercises in between making his observational rounds and stuff. That is the focus of his training. Not running sprints or running for endurance, or lifting weights or flipping tractor tires. No. He does mostly qi-gong.

When Sifu Chen would visit and give seminars, he would always place heavy emphasis on the importance of qi-gong, far more so than on practicing the taiji forms. That's part of my own problem: I like practicing forms, and I don't like practicing qi-gong so much. So my own development has remained very rudimentary, but that's my own problem and I accept it. I remember grasping his arm in my hands. And then he decided to move. And it was like trying to hold an oak tree from swaying in the wind. I could simply feel this power in his movement, if he wanted to move there, nothing I could do would stop him. And he didn't need to beat me down to get thru me. He could just walk thru me. Effortless.

At any rate, I suspect the true nature of qi may be more connected to the uncharted capabilities of the brain rather than an external force. It just may be that the Chinese described it in this particular way, and were content with that description. It's the nosey Westerners who want to dissect and label everything and aren't happy with anything short of a scientific explanation.

So that's my take on it, anyway. Far less than perfect, but it's what I got.

 

[blindsage]

quick question for those who do not believe in Qi: do any of you have a background in any of the internal martial arts and/or qi-gong practice? This would be the various Taiji schools, Xing-i, Bagua, Aikido, the qi-gong that is usually practiced alongside these arts as well?

I'm just curious if any of you folks have made any attempts to actually experience it, or if you are making your judgements based on a purely scientific perspective without any hands-on experience with the topic?

As I've stated before, I believe that most of the teachers of these arts do not themselves have an adequate understanding nor mastery of their own qi, and are teaching the internal arts as a primarily external art. I don't think they necessarily are doing it on purpose, I suspect that most of them BELIEVE they have mastery of their qi, but they are fooling themselves or have been fooled by others. So having experience with these arts under the wrong teacher can also lead to a denial of Qi, but at least I'd like to know if you folks have made any effort in that direction during your martial careers.

I suppose yoga could also be counted among these arts, tho I believe the common healthclub yoga class falls into the same category as the deluded taiji teachers. I think most of those people are teaching a purely physical exercise version of yoga, and have likewise lost most or all internal connections. But under the right teacher, yoga could, I suspect, be a valid avenue as well.

Anyway, just curious. Thanks.

I've done a little qigong in the past, and I'm a relatively new student in Bagua and I'm starting Taiji soon. I'm open to the idea of Qi, but as with all things I'm a skeptic. I'm not saying I do or don't believe in it, I'm saying give me something to work with, and folks aren't really doing that. I'm interested in experiencing qi, but I'm also not going to assume anything I experience in qigong practice can be explained by some undefinable 'force'. Maybe it can be, and maybe I will define it that way eventually, but I'm not going to assume that's the explanation, and since it doesn't seem particularly logical to me, I'm going to exhaust all other explanations first. But as a famous vulcan once said, take away the impossible and what you have left must be true. I don't disbelieve in qi, I just want to exhaust all other explanations first.

And just to the issue of only using 10% of our brains, its a myth. http://www.snopes.com/science/stats/10percent.asp

 

[Archangel M]

On the 10% of the brain thing:

http://www.snopes.com/science/stats/10percent.asp

 

[bluekey88]

Interesting stories, particularly about the mathemeticians and chess masters and such. It illustrates how powerful and incompletely understood the human brain really is.

I think that the translation that many like to use for qi = energy, may be part of the problem. It may work as a direct translation, but I'm not sure it captures the true nature of the phenomenon.

Qi is often described as an energy that permeates everything in the universe. I dunno about that. What I suspect it MAY be (and this is just me speculating) is an ability to tap into a function of the brain that most people are unable to tap, or at least aren't able to do it consciously or consistently. Hence, your moments of perfection while skiing the moguls. Not something you can do every time, but for at least that one run, your were PERFECT.

I've read that most people only use some 10% or so of their brain's capacity. I don't really know what that means, exactly. Is the other 90% pure memory storage? Or are there possibly deeper reasoning and computation capabilities that most people never delve into? I don't know. But maybe what we have come to label as "Qi" is simply the ability to tap into some deeper region of the mind that is often out of reach for most people. Maybe there are some hidden "switches" in the unused portions of the brain that sort of get triggered thru the internal martial arts.

Maybe qi-gong exercises somehow bring us into reach of some deeper region of the brain, or something. Maybe the internal arts capitalize on this and enable the accomplished to use this deeper brain capability to drive their practice and their martial technique. And the result is sort of a tubo-charged performance, and "energy" driving your technique. What we call "qi".

I've always said that I believe it is subtle and tricky and not easily grasped. I don't believe that the average taiji student EVER truly grasps it, yet they all want to believe (and want to convince you) that they have from about the second week forward. Most of it is nonsense. But I think there are some who are really accomplished, and they rise to a level far above the average, and they do it thru effortlessness. This ability is what has simply become labelled as "Qi", a Chinese term that has been brought to the West and kept in use for lack of a better description.

I don't know much about Chinese culture, to be honest. And I don't know much about how Chinese culture affects how the Chinese think about and ponder things. But it seems to me that they found something that works, and they accept it and label it as "qi". It's the Western culture that is obsessive about giving everything a scientific label and description. There may yet be a Western scientific label and description to be had regarding qi, but I'm simply not convinced that it's been truly figured out yet. And I think discarding it as nonsense is short-sighted.

You commented about similar studies done on elite athletes. I think Sifu Chen from the article is in something of a category all his own, in comparison to the type of elite athletes that are probably most often tested. I am admittedly making a big supposition in saying that, because I don't really know much about who has been tested in this way. But my point is that Sifu Chen is an elite taiji man. But I'm not sure he would fit the bill of "elite athlete" when compared to sprinters, high-jumpers, pole-vaulters, hammer-throwers, skiers, weight-lifters and such. I don't believe he trains with the same kind of physicality that those others would. Granted, when he was younger I believe he trained in some external arts, Northern Shaolin or something. But now he practices his taiji, and he practices it as a viable martial art. But he spends HUGE amounts of time practicing his qi-gong, putting far more emphasis on that. Sifu has told me that Sifu Chen has (or had) a job as a night watchman somewhere. It was a quiet shift. He would spend the whole night standing around doing his qi-gong exercises in between making his observational rounds and stuff. That is the focus of his training. Not running sprints or running for endurance, or lifting weights or flipping tractor tires. No. He does mostly qi-gong.

When Sifu Chen would visit and give seminars, he would always place heavy emphasis on the importance of qi-gong, far more so than on practicing the taiji forms. That's part of my own problem: I like practicing forms, and I don't like practicing qi-gong so much. So my own development has remained very rudimentary, but that's my own problem and I accept it. I remember grasping his arm in my hands. And then he decided to move. And it was like trying to hold an oak tree from swaying in the wind. I could simply feel this power in his movement, if he wanted to move there, nothing I could do would stop him. And he didn't need to beat me down to get thru me. He could just walk thru me. Effortless.

At any rate, I suspect the true nature of qi may be more connected to the uncharted capabilities of the brain rather than an external force. It just may be that the Chinese described it in this particular way, and were content with that description. It's the nosey Westerners who want to dissect and label everything and aren't happy with anything short of a scientific explanation.

So that's my take on it, anyway. Far less than perfect, but it's what I got.

Good post FC. I agree with most of it. However, where we disagree, I think is the crux of the matter.

I agree...most people do not function at full cpacity. They do not tap into all of their potential. Often, the 10% nof the brain thing comes up...that's a bit of a fallacy. In actual fact, we use all of our brains pretty much all of the time. Makes no sense to have large chunks of grey matter (the biggest energy sink in our body) going unused. However, by and large, we only have concious access ot about 10%. We don;t have ot think about breathing, circulation, hormonal balance, etc....all that happens at a subconcious automatic level. Through training, some people can influence that to a degree....but for the most part, the brain/body runs without a lot of help from that bit that makes soemone themselves (often called the mind).

I totally agree that the idea of being in the zone, doign something in that moment of perfection is similar to what a lot of people refer to as ki experiences and concede that both parties may be using different terms to describe the same phenomenon.

However, tapping into ones brain, while it might explain how one performs at extraordinary levels of physical/mental ability, does not explain adequately things like chi/ki healing...teh ability to project ki...to disrupt/cahnge others' energy. This, to me, is one of the big claims of chi/ki. That an advanced practitioner can lay his hands on or near someone and effect change in that person. These claims don't seem to jive with physics. Nor have they stood up to simple experimentation.

My favorite example is an elegant study taht was put together by a 10 year old girl. She learned about chi and about how a particular qigong master could heal with touch. She met this guy, he demonstrated how his palms could get warm, he showed her teh tingly touch demonstration. She then proposed he do the same thing to some random volunteer. First he'd do his thing as normal and most of the people reported sensing someting. They repeated the process, but this time with a curtain between himself and the people. They'd put their hand through the curtain and then indicate when they sensed the qigong master doing his thing. This time no one could tell when he was manipulating/extending chi.

So, can ki be used ot explain how people accomlish extradoinary physical and mental feats? Sure...but again I contend there is better, less loaded and more accurate language to do the same thing. the minute you start addin gon the projection stuff...teh claims get more out there and that mnuch harder to substantiate.

Peace,
Erik

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

The sad part is, I am not trying to change anyone's mind!

Don't be disengenuous.

The very nature of this challenge to prove that you are in the right. Thus, to win your challenge, you must therefore change the viewpoint of others.

The fact that you've couched this in a 'prove me wrong' fashion does not alter that. You only did this because you know that you cannot prove the existence of Ki, so you've taken the rout of trying to get the skeptics to prove that it doesn't. Your intent is to show that skeptics cannot disprove something that you believe in.

If you had simply started a thread about how wonderful Ki is in a sectio of the forum dedicated to Ki based arts and received skeptical responses, it would be perfectly reasonable to ask the skeptic to disprove you.

But you went to general martial arts and said, 'prove me wrong.' So please do not belittle yourself by pretending that you're not looking to change the minds of others.

There is not a thing wrong with trying to share your beliefs with others, nor is there a thing wrong with trying to convince others (so long as one is honest about how they try to do so).

Daniel

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

quick question for those who do not believe in Qi: do any of you have a background in any of the internal martial arts and/or qi-gong practice? This would be the various Taiji schools, Xing-i, Bagua, Aikido, the qi-gong that is usually practiced alongside these arts as well?

I'm just curious if any of you folks have made any attempts to actually experience it, or if you are making your judgements based on a purely scientific perspective without any hands-on experience with the topic?

As I've stated before, I believe that most of the teachers of these arts do not themselves have an adequate understanding nor mastery of their own qi, and are teaching the internal arts as a primarily external art. I don't think they necessarily are doing it on purpose, I suspect that most of them BELIEVE they have mastery of their qi, but they are fooling themselves or have been fooled by others. So having experience with these arts under the wrong teacher can also lead to a denial of Qi, but at least I'd like to know if you folks have made any effort in that direction during your martial careers.

I suppose yoga could also be counted among these arts, tho I believe the common healthclub yoga class falls into the same category as the deluded taiji teachers. I think most of those people are teaching a purely physical exercise version of yoga, and have likewise lost most or all internal connections. But under the right teacher, yoga could, I suspect, be a valid avenue as well.

Anyway, just curious. Thanks.

No experience in a specifically ki based art.

I do not consider myself a skeptic of the existence of Ki. I've defined how I view it and am open to the idea that it could go beyond that.

I certainly believe that the human body has a self contained energy and that it can be internally directed, either by the individual or under the guidance of someone else.

But I am skeptical of people who claim that they can levitate and are clearly just jumping by use of their gluts and outter thigh muscles. I'm skeptical of martial arts instructors who claim to teach a no touch knock out, but cannot perform the technique on anyone outside of those they've spent a considerable amount of time grooming.

I am equally skeptical of so called faith healers. Knocking people over and yelling out religious sounding talk while passing the basket for donations is the height of sacrilidge. The more of an event that it becomes the more skeptical of it I become. Funny how such performances go against the dictates of scripture (speaking of Christian faith healers; I am not familiar with the methods of faith healers outside of the various flavors of Christianity).

Both sets of people are simply charlatans and huxters. One group calls it Ki, the other calls it Faith. But a charlatan is a charlatan, no matter what mask they wear.

Daniel

 

[Flying Crane]

On the 10% of the brain thing:

http://www.snopes.com/science/stats/10percent.asp

Thanks for the link.

Yet Exile has posted some examples related to mathemeticians and chess players that clearly show the brain has extraordinary capabilties that are not fully understood, and that most of us are unable to tap. So maybe the 10% bit is a myth, but I think there is still some level of unknown in the mix. And I do believe that most of us are not utilizing nearly all of our potential. Hell, when I take a look around me, I sometimes wonder if people are deliberately operating so far below capacity that I'm often surprised they are able to walk upright.

At any rate, I don't have any proof to back up what I was postulating. I was really just tossing out some thoughts I had on the matter, somthing that seems plausible to me, but I could be way off. Or there could be something to it.

 

[Flying Crane]

However, tapping into ones brain, while it might explain how one performs at extraordinary levels of physical/mental ability, does not explain adequately things like chi/ki healing...teh ability to project ki...to disrupt/cahnge others' energy. This, to me, is one of the big claims of chi/ki. That an advanced practitioner can lay his hands on or near someone and effect change in that person. These claims don't seem to jive with physics. Nor have they stood up to simple experimentation.

I agree, much of this kind of thing ought to be looked at with a heavy dose of skepticism. I think I've been pretty clear in my postings on the subject that I don't believe in the no-touch knockouts, levitation, or throwing chi-balls to the bewilderment and destruction of one's enemies. I do, however, believe that there may be something to the ability to disrupt or manipulate another's qi. As I've stated previously, I think it's all very subtle and not something that just anybody can do. But I think there might be something to it. I've not witnessed believeable examples of it myself, but I've heard stories and I would like the opportunity to witness some more from knowledgeable sources, such as Sifu Chen of my article link. So while I am a believer in qi, I am also very skeptical about most claims. And the more fantastic the claim, the more skeptical I am.

 

[Flying Crane]

I am equally skeptical of so called faith healers.

Yes, I had the opportunity to attend a presentation put on by a Chinese martial arts sifu and supposed healer. The presentation was billed as a demonstration of Traditional Chinese healing methods. I was intrigued enough to go and see what was up.

It was total bunk. He was claiming to use a no-touch method of qi to heal what ails ya, right on the spot. Didn't do anything for my knee that had been bothering me for several months at that time. He also claimed that he could heal your loved ones if you just show him a photograph of that person.

His main push was to sign people up for a very expensive, week-long course so that he could teach his healing methods to you, and then you could make lots of money by healing those around you.

Total bull-****, and this is the kind of presentation that really puts a bad spin on the whole qi subject. If there is really something to it, which I believe there is, it gets such a bad name from people like this that nobody is willing to consider the possiblity at all.

So yeah, as I've stated numerous times now, there is a lot of nonsense in the arena. But again, I still believe that underneath it all, there is really something there.

 

[tellner]

Then there's the language we're dealing with. A professor I had years back described Chinese as "the language of no grammar and a million idioms". Qi means a huge number of things. Off the top of my head I remember...

Breath
Nutrition from food
The energy you lose by being a parent
The energy and life you get from your parents
Whatever it is that powers the world
Technical medical term for vitality/life energy

I'm willing to grant the first four. The last two? Others? If you have a shred of honesty be precise.

 

[JadecloudAlchemist]

Breath
Nutrition from food
The energy you lose by being a parent
The energy and life you get from your parents
Whatever it is that powers the world
Technical medical term for vitality/life energy

I think Xi fits breath best.

Nutrients from food would be Ying Qi.

Energy from parents would be Yuan Jing(IMO DNA)(Jing Zi=semen)Converted into Yuan Qi from Yuan Jing.

What ever powers the world would have to be broken down into energies that occur from the earth like Geothermal to energies in the air like weather.
Chi in Japanese is blood(In Chinese it is Xue)I don't know if that is what you mean by technical medical you might have to ask a more detailed question and I will try to answer it.

 

[Empty Hands]

I've read that most people only use some 10% or so of their brain's capacity. I don't really know what that means, exactly.

It means nothing, because it's a myth. An extremely common myth, but there is no scientific backing behind it. There is no scientific reason to believe that there are "dark" regions of the brain containing mysterious abilities waiting to be tapped.

ETA: Oops, should have read ahead. Sorry FC.

 

[JadeDragon3]

Why is it that people don't believe in things that they can not see or touch? I believe in ki (chi in chinese martial arts) exists. Chi/ki is a internal energy that can not be seen. When chi/ki gets blocked and can not flow smoothly through the body thats when you get sick or injured. It it through the meridians in the body that chi/ki flow. Accupuncture works on this theory. I have seen masters do some pretty impressive things by being able to channel/control the flow of their internal energy that a normal person wouldn't be able to do unless he had training in the internal arts.

 

[exile]

Why is it that people don't believe in things that they can not see or touch? I believe in ki (chi in chinese martial arts) exists. Chi/ki is a internal energy that can not be seen. When chi/ki gets blocked and can not flow smoothly through the body thats when you get sick or injured. It it through the meridians in the body that chi/ki flow. Accupuncture works on this theory. I have seen masters do some pretty impressive things by being able to channel/control the flow of their internal energy that a normal person wouldn't be able to do unless he had training in the internal arts.

Hmm... like air, you mean, or the existence of prime numbers, or electrons? Stuff like that, that you can't see or touch and that no one believes in?

 

[tellner]

JA, the point is that "Qi" can mean many things. It's important to be precise about what is meant when using a word that has so many different possible interpretations.

 

[blindsage]

Why is it that people don't believe in things that they can not see or touch? I believe in ki (chi in chinese martial arts) exists. Chi/ki is a internal energy that can not be seen. When chi/ki gets blocked and can not flow smoothly through the body thats when you get sick or injured. It it through the meridians in the body that chi/ki flow. Accupuncture works on this theory. I have seen masters do some pretty impressive things by being able to channel/control the flow of their internal energy that a normal person wouldn't be able to do unless he had training in the internal arts.

I believe in a few things that I can't see or touch, and I haven't said I don't believe in chi. But there has to be some experience to back it up, and for those that haven't experienced there should be some logical framework for explaining it. If it is an internal energy, that implies specific things, and should have some way of being measured. Because acupuncture uses this theory to explain why it works, again, doesn't mean that is the actual explanation. For a looong time some people believed the Earth was the center of the universe and that everything in the heavens revolved around it, because that was the best explanation they had for what they observed in the sky. Then they learned they was a better explanation, but it didn't changed what they observed, just their understanding of it.

Most of the skeptics on here aren't saying they won't believe it if someone can prove it to them. They're just asking for proof (some more aggresively than others maybe.) What your saying is "I believe it and experienc it, and the TCM explains itself using this framework, so why don't you believe?". There's a clear answer why not: 1) Those of us who are skeptics haven't experienced it, and 2) no one has given an explanation that seems to have logic behind it. Saying that TCM practioners explain what they do this way, and have for centuries, doesn't give us any real explanation it's just more "they believe it, so why don't you?"

And yes I will be exploring the potential of chi/ki in my qigong and bagua training, so assuming that being a skeptic means dogmatic unbelief is an unfounded assumption.

 

[JadecloudAlchemist]

the point is that "Qi" can mean many things. It's important to be precise about what is meant when using a word that has so many different possible interpretations.

Qi(&#27683 by itself simply means energy however if we put another Hanzi in front of it like:天=Heaven we get 天氣(literally Heaven's Qi)Which would be translated as Heaven's energy which is weather. Here is the Hanzi for breath as inhale:吸 this is Xi as in taking a deep breath in.
This Hanzi means Breath but it means exhale: 息
This Hanzi means inhale/exhale:呼吸 and it is Hu Xi. Chinese dictionary uses Qi to mean all these things resulting in quite a confusion.

gas / air / smell / weather / vital breath / to anger / to get angry / to be enraged

IMO I think that Qi(meaning energy) and used as a sufixs or a prefix would make more sense in our modern English translation.

Qi: 奇

strange / odd / weird / wonderful

I see where misunderstandings and on top of that used in a religious setting vs a TCM medical setting things can easily get scrambled.

I really would like to see the term demystified and IMO The use of the Chinese words and Hanzi and Japanese word and Kanji are essentially the same as their Western translations(except maybe if used in a religious context)