Defining Qi

Discussion on the three big Chinese internals, Yiquan, Bajiquan, Piguazhang and other similar styles.

Re: Defining Qi

Postby D_Glenn on Tue Mar 13, 2012 4:39 pm

Ron,

I am, reluctantly mind you, in the Chinese paradigm because my teacher is Chinese, only speaks mandarin, and this is some of the terminology that's used in our Baguazhang. I am one of the more science-minded people on this forum. I've correlated most of the Chinese terms to their Western physiology equivalent in numerous different posts. The problem is that Western understanding of the human body is an ongoing process so I no longer feel it's a worthwhile endeavor, when at the end of the day it's still only an incomplete understanding.

As for the rest of your post - I don't feel you've actually taken the time to really read or attempt to understand what I've written. You seem set in your ways. So I think this quote from Michael is appropriate here:

Michael wrote:[Ron Panuto], I think you make a *lot* of excellent posts and like almost everyone on RSF (almost LOL), it would probably be fun to meet up with you. Considering you seem to be very much into the healing side of things in addition to the martial arts, there are a lot of things I would love to discuss with you. With respect, I kindly suggest that it's not very helpful for you to get into internal threads. The same for Mo Ling, John Wang, Chris McKinley, kshurika, JAB, Ron Panunto, and several others whose screen names I've forgotten. One or several of you can always be counted on to jump feet first into every thread that brings out your issues, so please stop it. To me, it comes across like vegetarians walking into a BBQ and trying to give people a guilt trip. Just let us have our fun.



.
One part moves, every part moves; One part stops, every part stops.

YSB Internal Chinese Martial Arts Youtube
User avatar
D_Glenn
Great Old One
 
Posts: 5308
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:04 pm
Location: Denver Colorado

Re: Defining Qi

Postby Ron Panunto on Tue Mar 13, 2012 7:05 pm

D_Glenn wrote:Ron,

I am, reluctantly mind you, in the Chinese paradigm because my teacher is Chinese, only speaks mandarin, and this is some of the terminology that's used in our Baguazhang. I am one of the more science-minded people on this forum. I've correlated most of the Chinese terms to their Western physiology equivalent in numerous different posts. The problem is that Western understanding of the human body is an ongoing process so I no longer feel it's a worthwhile endeavor, when at the end of the day it's still only an incomplete understanding.

As for the rest of your post - I don't feel you've actually taken the time to really read or attempt to understand what I've written. You seem set in your ways. So I think this quote from Michael is appropriate here:

Michael wrote:[Ron Panuto], I think you make a *lot* of excellent posts and like almost everyone on RSF (almost LOL), it would probably be fun to meet up with you. Considering you seem to be very much into the healing side of things in addition to the martial arts, there are a lot of things I would love to discuss with you. With respect, I kindly suggest that it's not very helpful for you to get into internal threads. The same for Mo Ling, John Wang, Chris McKinley, kshurika, JAB, Ron Panunto, and several others whose screen names I've forgotten. One or several of you can always be counted on to jump feet first into every thread that brings out your issues, so please stop it. To me, it comes across like vegetarians walking into a BBQ and trying to give people a guilt trip. Just let us have our fun.



.


Touche, I guess you both can't be wrong - I'm out of this thread on defining qi, I actually should have known better. My bad.
Ron Panunto
Wuji
 
Posts: 1310
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 6:33 am
Location: Langhorne, PA, USA

Re: Defining Qi

Postby GaryR on Mon Apr 09, 2012 9:36 pm

Not to spoil the Qi Fun, but Ron has great points.

I think it can be put more simply, as this - the chinese hypothesis of Qi as it relates to TCM was postulated thousands of years ago when the knowledge of the human body and its internal processes was infentesimally less. To this day none of their hypothesis relating to Qi flowing through the 12 main and 2 extra meridians have been proven to exist in any measurable form. Nor has there been any evidence that the Qi is somehow seperate than physical/mental conditioning, and that this Qi can be bolstered through training methods .

While the Qi hypothesis can be of some use by way of analogy/metaphor in the MA context of teaching, it is nontheless a false one. It provides no scientific or valid physiological basis from which to begin to properly describe the actual mechanics and physics involved in the movement.

Take an easy conceptual example--Our mind controls our body' as a demonstrable principal. vs. the "yi leads the qi". Perhaps many of you with some training in the old chinese model will understand this comparison, although many of us will disagree on what yi and qi mean, leading to more confusion due to a lack of specificity. This discconect and ambiguity of the terms, along with of course selective interpretations of such terms makes it impossible to communicate using those terms alone becuase they have no grounding in testable fact or percieved reality. (along with being so old and permutating in context and use over time and cultures).

Consequently, as much fun as the "What is Qi" threads always are, its really a bad question, which has no answer of objective utility. One would be better off adopting an evidence based training model that doesn't require the use of an antiquated and nebulous hypothesis/term.

Anyhow, carry on, fairytales and old myths are fun to discuss and twist into a context that we think we can use in some fashion. But to each his own.

G
Last edited by GaryR on Mon Apr 09, 2012 9:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
GaryR

 

Re: Defining Qi

Postby Daniel on Tue Apr 10, 2012 12:16 am

Edited for brevity.

D.

Sarcasm. Oh yeah, like that´ll work.
Last edited by Daniel on Sat Mar 02, 2013 10:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
Daniel
Great Old One
 
Posts: 1854
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 8:48 am

Re: Defining Qi

Postby GaryR on Tue Apr 10, 2012 6:06 pm

Daniel wrote:Gary, with that kind of sweeping comment on how qi works (well, as you seem to imply, "doesn´t work"), would you mind describing a bit of your background in qigong and neigong, daoist meditation and chinese medicine?


Hello Daniel,

I have enough knowledge, background, and experience to post the foregoing and discuss it. Perhaps you would care to address the content of my post directly?

My "sweeping comment[s]" did more than imply Qi doesn't work, I asserted it (Qi) doesn't exist at all. Moreover, even if one does subscribe to a "belief" in Qi, (which is likely where you are at), there is still no objectively demonstrable martial benefit to such a belief above and beyond any other antiquated and arbitrary metaphor.

I would also add that I do not think any special "Qi" energy is required for the practice of any IMA at any level. Nor do I specifically think there is a single method one could demonstrate that requires the ingredient of "Qi" to pull off to any greater effect than the same method done w/out such alleged "Qi".

Best Regards,

Gary
GaryR

 

Re: Defining Qi

Postby Daniel on Tue Apr 10, 2012 10:31 pm

Edited for brevity.

D.

Sarcasm. Oh yeah, like that´ll work.
Last edited by Daniel on Sat Mar 02, 2013 10:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
Daniel
Great Old One
 
Posts: 1854
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 8:48 am

Re: Defining Qi

Postby GaryR on Wed Apr 11, 2012 11:45 am

Daniel wrote:Hi. I thought that given the sweeping view of the subject and the comment, "Anyhow, carry on, fairytales and old myths are fun to discuss and twist into a context that we think we can use in some fashion. But to each his own" it would have benefited from knowing some detail about your background and training in qigong, neigong, daoist meditation and/or chinese medicine, as those are the fields that specialize in the subject over decades of study and training and give people the actual skill to feel qi clearly and understand it in depth.


Sure, and I answered you--“I have enough knowledge, background, and experience to post the foregoing and discuss it".

Daniel wrote:The necessity of qi in the IMA is a slightly different subject, and I think that many in the West overemphasize the idea of it.



How do you define “slightly different”? What level of overemphasis? I would think it would be the inverse situation re overemphasis with the Chinese being more accepting of the Qi concept?

Daniel wrote:There is so much that, say, mingjin, in Xingyi needs to have in the body first before moving on to the subtler skills of anjin.


While some may know what you mean by jin distinctions, as many may here in this niche' community (even though we can all argue over their precise definitions online)--they are still not good descriptors of what is technically going on. Nor is a belief in or building of “Qi” required for any of it. ---> You have still failed to address the content of my actual post.

Daniel wrote:I have trained in Daoist work for more than two decades, taught qigong professionally, as well as IMA and meditation, and I work with classical chinese medicine and acupuncture. The people I trained for and still train for in those fields can all clearly feel and separate many clear levels of yi, xin, qi and jins as well as their links to the physical body. They had huge amounts of training behind their skills, and thought that level of precision was something to be taken for granted. I can feel it to that level of precision too, as can my students (depending on their training-level, of course).


Good for you, and good for them. But how do you “clearly feel” and “separate many clear levels of yi, xin, qi and jins as well as their links to the physical body”? What metrics are you using, and how are you defining said terms?

Daniel wrote:Western science has locked itself to the current level of technology. This means that it can only try to prove up to the current level of technology in the machines they have available to measure what qi might be. Personally I am not interested in what Western scientific tests might find, but maybe there will be something to look at in 2-300 years.


Wow, you have just convinced me that the Chinese medical/energy model that is thousands of years old, born from physics / physiological ignorance in comparison to today—is still a few thousand years ahead of all modern physics, science, medicine and technology detecting its presence in the meridians. Oh wait, you didn’t. But how could you? Your “[p]ersonally ... not interested in what Western scientific tests might find”. If you are not open to rationale and testable information or other viewpoints, what is the point of discussion? Perhaps you would you like to discuss your CV some more? Or hire men in yellow jump suits to jump off you as you hold a qigong stance (que yellow bamboo :)

Daniel wrote: Enough quality in the training mentioned above, however, will give anyone a clear ability to feel qi and separate it clearly from yi, xin, shen, li, etc, and how they weave together.


Enough training will enable one to do and feel numerous things. When the context is provided within the terms and training, anyone could be said to have a “clear ability” to feel qi and “separate it clearly from yi, xin, shen....” within their own world.

best

g
Last edited by GaryR on Wed Apr 11, 2012 11:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
GaryR

 

Re: Defining Qi

Postby Daniel on Thu Apr 12, 2012 12:33 am

Well, if you don´t want to give a clear background of your skills and training in the field we´re discussing, I´m out.

Regards


Daniel

Sarcasm. Oh yeah, like that´ll work.
Daniel
Great Old One
 
Posts: 1854
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 8:48 am

Re: Defining Qi

Postby Bao on Thu Apr 12, 2012 12:52 pm

"Qi" is an ancient philosophical term and should be treated as such.
Thoughts on Tai Chi (My Tai Chi blog)
- Storms make oaks take deeper root. -George Herbert
- To affect the quality of the day, is the highest of all arts! -Walden Thoreau
Bao
Great Old One
 
Posts: 9032
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 12:46 pm
Location: High up north

Re: Defining Qi

Postby GaryR on Thu Apr 12, 2012 2:31 pm

Daniel wrote:Well, if you don´t want to give a clear background of your skills and training in the field we´re discussing, I´m out.



Daniel, if your profile dates are accurate I have been training/studying and teaching IMA for about 1-2 years less than you have. It seems like just yesterday since this site was erected, and I've been away, but I thought the whole idea of the "distillery" was for experienced people to discuss issues without a pissing match over CV's in the process? Anyhow, I can see your point, why discuss Qigong etc. with someone who hasn't practiced, fair enough. Nonetheless, the proof of the existence of Qi should not lie in the subjective validation of the practitioners / teachers.

Now, if you would like to actually address my foregoing points go for it...

best,

G
Last edited by GaryR on Thu Apr 12, 2012 3:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
GaryR

 

Re: Defining Qi

Postby GaryR on Thu Apr 12, 2012 2:35 pm

Bao wrote:"Qi" is an ancient philosophical term and should be treated as such.


Exactly, now if that could only be the end of the arguments on it!
Last edited by GaryR on Thu Apr 12, 2012 2:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
GaryR

 

Re: Defining Qi

Postby Wanderingdragon on Thu Apr 12, 2012 4:23 pm

Wrong, but also anyone who understands Qi is not arguing.
The point . is absolute
Wanderingdragon
Wuji
 
Posts: 6258
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 12:33 pm
Location: Chgo Il

Re: Defining Qi

Postby GaryR on Thu Apr 12, 2012 4:40 pm

Wanderingdragon wrote:Wrong, but also anyone who understands Qi is not arguing.


I think a simple search of most MA boards will disprove that notion. Heck arguing over what Qi is, who understands it is practically an ima board pastime.

Are you saying you understand Qi? Perhaps you would like to address my post or add something substantive?

Best

G
GaryR

 

Re: Defining Qi

Postby Wanderingdragon on Thu Apr 12, 2012 4:58 pm

No, I have no clue what makes a sperm swim
The point . is absolute
Wanderingdragon
Wuji
 
Posts: 6258
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 12:33 pm
Location: Chgo Il

Re: Defining Qi

Postby GaryR on Thu Apr 12, 2012 5:08 pm

Wanderingdragon wrote:No, I have no clue what makes a sperm swim


Well then why don't you educate yourself:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/2760623.stm


G
GaryR

 

PreviousNext

Return to Xingyiquan - Baguazhang - Taijiquan

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest