OP
OP
Some things might be beyond our power to define. I do not think that chi is one of them. Nobody is writing off anything but charlatans who claim super powers.
The Existance of Chi
- Thread starter Makalakumu
- Start date
Some things might be beyond our power to define. I do not think that chi is one of them. Nobody is writing off anything but charlatans who claim super powers.
Kodanjaclay
Blue Belt
That is one easy to spot however... Qi/Chi/Ki is not a metaphysical or supernatural power or force, it is natural, inherent in everything that lives. You will always have those of questionable ethics. It is an unfortunate fact of life, so its best not to dwell on them.
We have allready addressed that in this thread, seems some are. Needless though, there are diseases, sysmptoms, and parts of the body even that humans cannot define or understand as of yet. This doesn't make them mystical or spiritual, neither does it make them unimportant, or less existent.
I responded to the statement:
Definition has absolutely nothing to do with existence, as is the topic of this thread. It also has nothing to do with the ability to be used or do work.
7sm
B
Black Bear
Guest
You guys are all nuts. Of course chi is real. I sprinkle it over bland foods to give it some kick. You can get it at Salvadoran grocers.
If you don't believe it exists, I challenge you to try a tablespoon of my homemade bolognese with, and another without.
If you don't believe it exists, I challenge you to try a tablespoon of my homemade bolognese with, and another without.
OP
OP
Definition has everything to do with existance. If something is totally undefined, there are no words to describe the phenomenon. If something is partially defined, it means that we have words to describe a phenomenon, but that explanation is incomplete.
Your missing the point. Defined, partially defined, or undefined, something can still exist. Existance is not controled by definition. If your of the mindset that only things which you know are in existence than yes, you are correct. However, there are a great many things in the world that are not defined as of yet, and this doesn't make them any less existant.
7sm
OP
OP
Name one of those things and we shall see.
Kodanjaclay
Blue Belt
How about this... a few years ago, people believed the celocamph to be exinct. We now know that not to be true. We also just found a new species of whale, this very year. PArticle physics has new avenues, as have the majority of the sciences. SARS was an unknown illness until earlier this year, and the dynamics behind its transmittal are still largely unknown. The genetic code has been cracked, but we are still ignorant on exactly how it works, and the list goes on and on. New discoveries are made which brings them into the realm of the "defined" but there are things which we still do not know, and lie within the realm of theory... a good and easy example is a black hole, which when crossing the event horizon, gravity takes down light and and matter into the singularity, and if a person was to get pulled in, that person would be ripped apart until finally the very atoms would be left, and those would be pulled apart. Now I ask you this, just how do we know that? The answer is that we don't. We are going by obsarvation and patterns. This is exactly the same process that was used when Qi was first defined. Bio-electric energy does exist; however, I doubt, seriously doubt, anything like what the ancients proposed exists. Qi means both air and energy, and we know that both of these exist. Further, we know that energy can neither be created nor destroyed; however, it does change phase. BUT when this was first proposed, it would have been considered foolish, and depending on the era, witchcraft. Today we have evidence to suggest that acupuncture works, to varying degrees. And yet, this is a practice which evidence leads us to think was practice by the "iceman" (due to tattoos which correspond to acupoints) who lived just a few years before us. (lol).
Before one can just discount anything, it should be analyzed thoroughly and investigated. Even scientific law is changed when new discoveries make that a necessity.
Before one can just discount anything, it should be analyzed thoroughly and investigated. Even scientific law is changed when new discoveries make that a necessity.
Kodanjaclay
Blue Belt
ROFL. Good point... how could I have missed that?
Here is one that every good science person should understand.
The nomenclature of a virus. That is currently not defined. Scientist do not yet understand where a virus fits in the nomenclature of the animal kingdom. Yet, I can assure you that someone suffering from advanced HIV or AIDS will contest that viruses are extremely existant.
We are getting off topic here however. I'm simply making the point that because we cannot completely define chi, doesn't make it less existant.
7sm
OP
OP
My point is that our inability to completely define chi makes it less usefull. Without a full scientific definition, all we are going to have is more misconceptions of what it can and cannot do. The only reason cranks who claim super powers are believed is because we only have half a definition. This subject need not be mystical.
Kodanjaclay
Blue Belt
Up,
WE have shown several scientific facts that dispute your assertion. One does not need to understand differential equations to work with math or algebra. You should keep a more open mind.
WE have shown several scientific facts that dispute your assertion. One does not need to understand differential equations to work with math or algebra. You should keep a more open mind.
I think you are almost on the right track here. Not being completely defined doesn't make it less usefull, but only less credited for its usefullness. Not being defined, doesn't stop a trained martial artist from benefiting from it when punching or kicking correctly with it. So we see it is not less useful being undefined, only less understood. Its usefullness is the same, as is the genetic code, but now we in our own selfish human minds "believe" it exists. As human being we have a history of not believing the existence of things until "we" understand or "define" them.
7sm
OP
OP
I would consider myself a "believer" in the concept of chi. I have used it and have had it used to affect my body. Because of this, I find myself trying to understand "exactly" how this works. There is a difference between that and what we understand of it now.
Those assertions have supported my claim that concepts undefined do not exist. For instance, we know that a virus exists and that it can harm us, but we do not know exactly how to place it in our taxonomic system. I think this reflects a limitation of the system that will be revealed fully if we ever discover life on other planets. The assertion that the Ceolocanth discovered off the coast of africa somehow supports the concept that we know about something undefined is also incorrect. For instance, we knew that ceolocanths existed, just not in our time. Partially defined concepts exist, but are less usefull. All the the facts you brought to us fall under the catagory partially defined.
Just stop and think about how it would change our world to have a working scientific definition of chi. For instance, if it is bio-electric, it could be very easily manipulated from the outside...
It seems a bit like you are contradicting yourself by saying if undefined it doesn't exist, but I have felt it. Your feeling of chi proves it exists even if we had no word (chi) to associate with it.
Can you define a virus without the use of descriptive words? None of us truly can, but yet it still exists in our world. By your reasoning gravity has not allways existed. It only began to exist when we "defined" it. What about fire? It didn't exist before we defined it? That contradicts the First Law of Thermodynamics, Energy cannot be created nor destroyed.
7sm
OP
OP
Actually, it is perfectly consistant as I have stated that concepts with partial definitions are things that we can sense (if somewhat dimly)
I can define a virus with the letters AGCT in various combinations. Of course this only describes its genetic code, yet it does describe something about the virus. A partial definition. In the same light, people always knew gravity existed in some way. Even partially motile bacteria have a concept of this. The same can be said of fire.
I think that we are confusing the word "existance." If I say that undefined objects do not exist, I am saying that they do not exist in our human consciousness. With that being said, if we had no definition of Chi, we would have no idea of its existance even though in the "real" world, it does exist.
I don't remember you saying that, but sense even dimly is proof of existence. There is no correlation between partially defined things and things we can sense, even dimly sense. Your tying together existence and our knowing of this existence, there is no relationship between the two.
People did not allways know gravity existed, but maybe a better example would be an element such as Na (Sodium). We didn't "define" it until recently (relatively), but it allways existed, and it was used in the earth and did work and was sensed way before being "defined".
I said this allready and you disagreed. I said we (as humans) have a history of ignoring things until "we" define them, or accept their existence. That in no way means they did not exist, did not do work, or were not sensed before we "defined" them. Taking your stance, then chi doesn't exist in our consciousness yet but it is still just as powerful and complete as it has allways been. Its usefullness and ability to do work is at the same level as it will be if/when we ever "define" it.
7sm
N
Ninway J
Guest
In other words, no matter how much or how little we know about chi, it is still there. It just is. We may have it defined later on, but that wouldn't make it more useful or more powerful than it was a-thousand years ago.
Kodanjaclay
Blue Belt
We are fond of labels. If you ask someone why a bird flies south for the winter, they will say instinct. But when you begin to press for more information about instinct, in the end, they have to say its just the way things are. Just because we label something, and then agree to the label, does not mean that the label is accurate, or even representative of the whole. Labels are our way of communicating... nothing more.
Similar threads
