Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Martial Arts and "chi"
Options
Replies
-
heiliskrimsli wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »heiliskrimsli wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »As to the spelling, I was taught by my instructor that it is Qi, and therefore in my practice it was Qigong. Sorry for the sloppiness. I
I agree stanmann571 that Qi is more than physical strength and being in shape. I was being a little sarcastic in my post directed at heilskrimsli "why chi?'" I apologize again for not using precision clarity in my posts.
I understood that you got it, I just wanted to spell it out for the haters/doubters.
As a practitioner/participant in systema (a Russian system/framework) which seeks to answer at least some of the questions, but still acknowledges that sometimes "we don't fully understand why this works this way" but it does. I generally don't even bother engaging... because I have a very low tolerance for woo... but some things work whether you understand them or not. And developing calm/relaxed dynamic tension in applying force is one of them.
"I don't understand this" and "This is magic" are not the same thing.
You're the only one asserting that it's magic.
I've asked how it can be measured and in what units and been given no answer. What that isn't magic cannot be measured?
Mental clarity. Insight. Enthusiasm. Character. Beauty. Intelligence. And a whole bunch of other abstractions. Yes, these have subcomponents or implications or manifestations that can be measured, just as does the abstraction chi. But it's silly reductionism to try to measure the abstractions directly.
I'm not saying these other things are synonyms for chi - not in the slightest.
I'm saying that you're trying to make the word fit into the realm of the fully concrete. Many abstractions don't do that, but we use them all the time in language. Lots of words (not just complex abstractions) don't represent things that are measurable, yet we still find the words useful for communication.
Many things that some traditional martial-arts practitioners describe using lots of language, some of which includes that scary word "chi", can be measured in terms of force, or reaction time (reflex activation, etc.), or via other tidy quantitative means. These folks also teach via physical demonstrations. They use other terms that can't be measured, too, like "twisting", "rooted", "commitment", etc., etc. . . . but I suspect those aren't as scary. And those terms, too, aren't magic, even though you can't measure them in a practical way without absurd reductionism.
I know I'm not going to change your mind. You (presumably) know you won't change my mind. Perhaps we can leave it to the reader to decide which of us, or both, is being more dogmatic.
5 -
heiliskrimsli wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »heiliskrimsli wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »As to the spelling, I was taught by my instructor that it is Qi, and therefore in my practice it was Qigong. Sorry for the sloppiness. I
I agree stanmann571 that Qi is more than physical strength and being in shape. I was being a little sarcastic in my post directed at heilskrimsli "why chi?'" I apologize again for not using precision clarity in my posts.
I understood that you got it, I just wanted to spell it out for the haters/doubters.
As a practitioner/participant in systema (a Russian system/framework) which seeks to answer at least some of the questions, but still acknowledges that sometimes "we don't fully understand why this works this way" but it does. I generally don't even bother engaging... because I have a very low tolerance for woo... but some things work whether you understand them or not. And developing calm/relaxed dynamic tension in applying force is one of them.
"I don't understand this" and "This is magic" are not the same thing.
You're the only one asserting that it's magic.
I've asked how it can be measured and in what units and been given no answer. What that isn't magic cannot be measured?
Mental clarity. Insight. Enthusiasm. Character. Beauty. Intelligence. And a whole bunch of other abstractions. Yes, these have subcomponents or implications or manifestations that can be measured, just as does the abstraction chi. But it's silly reductionism to try to measure the abstractions directly.
I'm not saying these other things are synonyms for chi - not in the slightest.
I'm saying that you're trying to make the word fit into the realm of the fully concrete. Many abstractions don't do that, but we use them all the time in language. Lots of words (not just complex abstractions) don't represent things that are measurable, yet we still find the words useful for communication.
Many things that some traditional martial-arts practitioners describe using lots of language, some of which includes that scary word "chi", can be measured in terms of force, or reaction time (reflex activation, etc.), or via other tidy quantitative means. These folks also teach via physical demonstrations. They use other terms that can't be measured, too, like "twisting", "rooted", "commitment", etc., etc. . . . but I suspect those aren't as scary. And those terms, too, aren't magic, even though you can't measure them in a practical way without absurd reductionism.
I know I'm not going to change your mind. You (presumably) know you won't change my mind. Perhaps we can leave it to the reader to decide which of us, or both, is being more dogmatic.
Scary?
No.
Completely ludicrous. There is no such thing as "chi". Everything you're talking about is neurochemical and neuroelectrical activity in the brain. No magic, no woo, no mysticism. Me knowing that and rejecting the assertion of "chi" does not make me "scared". I would similarly reject the entire concept if it was described as an infinitesimally small pink unicorn that lives inside the navel. Doesn't mean I'm afraid of unicorns.0 -
heiliskrimsli wrote: »heiliskrimsli wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »heiliskrimsli wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »As to the spelling, I was taught by my instructor that it is Qi, and therefore in my practice it was Qigong. Sorry for the sloppiness. I
I agree stanmann571 that Qi is more than physical strength and being in shape. I was being a little sarcastic in my post directed at heilskrimsli "why chi?'" I apologize again for not using precision clarity in my posts.
I understood that you got it, I just wanted to spell it out for the haters/doubters.
As a practitioner/participant in systema (a Russian system/framework) which seeks to answer at least some of the questions, but still acknowledges that sometimes "we don't fully understand why this works this way" but it does. I generally don't even bother engaging... because I have a very low tolerance for woo... but some things work whether you understand them or not. And developing calm/relaxed dynamic tension in applying force is one of them.
"I don't understand this" and "This is magic" are not the same thing.
You're the only one asserting that it's magic.
I've asked how it can be measured and in what units and been given no answer. What that isn't magic cannot be measured?
Mental clarity. Insight. Enthusiasm. Character. Beauty. Intelligence. And a whole bunch of other abstractions. Yes, these have subcomponents or implications or manifestations that can be measured, just as does the abstraction chi. But it's silly reductionism to try to measure the abstractions directly.
I'm not saying these other things are synonyms for chi - not in the slightest.
I'm saying that you're trying to make the word fit into the realm of the fully concrete. Many abstractions don't do that, but we use them all the time in language. Lots of words (not just complex abstractions) don't represent things that are measurable, yet we still find the words useful for communication.
Many things that some traditional martial-arts practitioners describe using lots of language, some of which includes that scary word "chi", can be measured in terms of force, or reaction time (reflex activation, etc.), or via other tidy quantitative means. These folks also teach via physical demonstrations. They use other terms that can't be measured, too, like "twisting", "rooted", "commitment", etc., etc. . . . but I suspect those aren't as scary. And those terms, too, aren't magic, even though you can't measure them in a practical way without absurd reductionism.
I know I'm not going to change your mind. You (presumably) know you won't change my mind. Perhaps we can leave it to the reader to decide which of us, or both, is being more dogmatic.
Scary?
No.
Completely ludicrous. There is no such thing as "chi". Everything you're talking about is neurochemical and neuroelectrical activity in the brain. No magic, no woo, no mysticism. Me knowing that and rejecting the assertion of "chi" does not make me "scared". I would similarly reject the entire concept if it was described as an infinitesimally small pink unicorn that lives inside the navel. Doesn't mean I'm afraid of unicorns.
I have to say that although I agree with you on the most basic level, if you think your objections intersect with anything anyone said since I last posted to this thread, you've probably missed the point.3 -
heiliskrimsli wrote: »heiliskrimsli wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »heiliskrimsli wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »As to the spelling, I was taught by my instructor that it is Qi, and therefore in my practice it was Qigong. Sorry for the sloppiness. I
I agree stanmann571 that Qi is more than physical strength and being in shape. I was being a little sarcastic in my post directed at heilskrimsli "why chi?'" I apologize again for not using precision clarity in my posts.
I understood that you got it, I just wanted to spell it out for the haters/doubters.
As a practitioner/participant in systema (a Russian system/framework) which seeks to answer at least some of the questions, but still acknowledges that sometimes "we don't fully understand why this works this way" but it does. I generally don't even bother engaging... because I have a very low tolerance for woo... but some things work whether you understand them or not. And developing calm/relaxed dynamic tension in applying force is one of them.
"I don't understand this" and "This is magic" are not the same thing.
You're the only one asserting that it's magic.
I've asked how it can be measured and in what units and been given no answer. What that isn't magic cannot be measured?
Mental clarity. Insight. Enthusiasm. Character. Beauty. Intelligence. And a whole bunch of other abstractions. Yes, these have subcomponents or implications or manifestations that can be measured, just as does the abstraction chi. But it's silly reductionism to try to measure the abstractions directly.
I'm not saying these other things are synonyms for chi - not in the slightest.
I'm saying that you're trying to make the word fit into the realm of the fully concrete. Many abstractions don't do that, but we use them all the time in language. Lots of words (not just complex abstractions) don't represent things that are measurable, yet we still find the words useful for communication.
Many things that some traditional martial-arts practitioners describe using lots of language, some of which includes that scary word "chi", can be measured in terms of force, or reaction time (reflex activation, etc.), or via other tidy quantitative means. These folks also teach via physical demonstrations. They use other terms that can't be measured, too, like "twisting", "rooted", "commitment", etc., etc. . . . but I suspect those aren't as scary. And those terms, too, aren't magic, even though you can't measure them in a practical way without absurd reductionism.
I know I'm not going to change your mind. You (presumably) know you won't change my mind. Perhaps we can leave it to the reader to decide which of us, or both, is being more dogmatic.
Scary?
No.
Completely ludicrous. There is no such thing as "chi". Everything you're talking about is neurochemical and neuroelectrical activity in the brain. No magic, no woo, no mysticism. Me knowing that and rejecting the assertion of "chi" does not make me "scared". I would similarly reject the entire concept if it was described as an infinitesimally small pink unicorn that lives inside the navel. Doesn't mean I'm afraid of unicorns.
I have to say that although I agree with you on the most basic level, if you think your objections intersect with anything anyone said since I last posted to this thread, you've probably missed the point.
The assertion that I find the word chi "scary" was directly made in the post I responded to.1 -
I've studied for over 40 years. I saw a lot of great Masters when I was in Japan. I saw a lot of fantastic movement and abilities. But, I never saw anyone practice "mind over matter".
By the way, someone mentioned the belt smelling? I got my first Black Belt in 1976. In Okinawa. Still have it. Never washed it. It DOES smell. Bought a new one in 1994, because it was so worn I was afraid I would ruin it.3 -
heiliskrimsli wrote: »heiliskrimsli wrote: »heiliskrimsli wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »heiliskrimsli wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »As to the spelling, I was taught by my instructor that it is Qi, and therefore in my practice it was Qigong. Sorry for the sloppiness. I
I agree stanmann571 that Qi is more than physical strength and being in shape. I was being a little sarcastic in my post directed at heilskrimsli "why chi?'" I apologize again for not using precision clarity in my posts.
I understood that you got it, I just wanted to spell it out for the haters/doubters.
As a practitioner/participant in systema (a Russian system/framework) which seeks to answer at least some of the questions, but still acknowledges that sometimes "we don't fully understand why this works this way" but it does. I generally don't even bother engaging... because I have a very low tolerance for woo... but some things work whether you understand them or not. And developing calm/relaxed dynamic tension in applying force is one of them.
"I don't understand this" and "This is magic" are not the same thing.
You're the only one asserting that it's magic.
I've asked how it can be measured and in what units and been given no answer. What that isn't magic cannot be measured?
Mental clarity. Insight. Enthusiasm. Character. Beauty. Intelligence. And a whole bunch of other abstractions. Yes, these have subcomponents or implications or manifestations that can be measured, just as does the abstraction chi. But it's silly reductionism to try to measure the abstractions directly.
I'm not saying these other things are synonyms for chi - not in the slightest.
I'm saying that you're trying to make the word fit into the realm of the fully concrete. Many abstractions don't do that, but we use them all the time in language. Lots of words (not just complex abstractions) don't represent things that are measurable, yet we still find the words useful for communication.
Many things that some traditional martial-arts practitioners describe using lots of language, some of which includes that scary word "chi", can be measured in terms of force, or reaction time (reflex activation, etc.), or via other tidy quantitative means. These folks also teach via physical demonstrations. They use other terms that can't be measured, too, like "twisting", "rooted", "commitment", etc., etc. . . . but I suspect those aren't as scary. And those terms, too, aren't magic, even though you can't measure them in a practical way without absurd reductionism.
I know I'm not going to change your mind. You (presumably) know you won't change my mind. Perhaps we can leave it to the reader to decide which of us, or both, is being more dogmatic.
Scary?
No.
Completely ludicrous. There is no such thing as "chi". Everything you're talking about is neurochemical and neuroelectrical activity in the brain. No magic, no woo, no mysticism. Me knowing that and rejecting the assertion of "chi" does not make me "scared". I would similarly reject the entire concept if it was described as an infinitesimally small pink unicorn that lives inside the navel. Doesn't mean I'm afraid of unicorns.
I have to say that although I agree with you on the most basic level, if you think your objections intersect with anything anyone said since I last posted to this thread, you've probably missed the point.
The assertion that I find the word chi "scary" was directly made in the post I responded to.
I think the kids say "triggering" now, to mean "scary" in the sense Ann meant it.2 -
No, I don't think "mind over matter" explains chi or could be in any way synonomous with chi.0
-
Chi could be harmful in excess amounts blocked; and therefore be called 'scary'.
0 -
Was this you?TheRoadDog wrote: »I've studied for over 40 years. I saw a lot of great Masters when I was in Japan. I saw a lot of fantastic movement and abilities. But, I never saw anyone practice "mind over matter".
By the way, someone mentioned the belt smelling? I got my first Black Belt in 1976. In Okinawa. Still have it. Never washed it. It DOES smell. Bought a new one in 1994, because it was so worn I was afraid I would ruin it.
Sorry. Could not resist that.
Credits to this deviantart user: http://edd-xsagi.deviantart.com/art/Skunk-fu-Master-skunk-157488256
who was inspired by the Skunk Fu! children's show.
If you should encounter such a problem again, I suggest Zoflora and very, very gently handwashing it!
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 402 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 998 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions