Ki is a hoax

[Ninjamom]

We practice qi gong forms (standing and moving) in our advanced class, and all the stances and many movements in the sword art I practice are based on gi cheon.

The more I've researched chi/ki, the more skeptical I have become, until I've pretty much written the whole thing off as wishful thinking, and/or an unwillingness to let go of old ideas for the sake of 'tradition'. Not meaning to rain on anyone else's parade, but just trying to be honest, since you asked for candor in where we stand.

 

[Makalakumu]

No, perception is not reality.

Hmmm, when you think about it, everything is a perception. Reality is just what people agree upon. :angel:

 

[Makalakumu]

Hmmm, when you think about it, everything is a perception. Reality is just what people agree upon. :angel:

That said, lets be real a moment. My teacher used a multimeter to find various acupuncture points on our bodies and these readings corresponded well with what has been found on the charts. They aren't always in the same spots, go figure, evolution and all. I've also trained with some fabulous TCM doctors in Tai Chi, there is something to the explanation they have to offer regarding various phenomenon.

In my opinion, chi is an overarching explanation for a number of phenomenon that have been separated or little studied in western science. As I have read the literature, what people call "chi" reminds me of the "placebo effect" no body really knows how it works, they only know that it somehow does work. My guess is that there are a lot of biologic phenomenon tied together and that it is incredibly difficult to tease them apart.

"Chi" or what we know it as in our culture, probably represents a mix and mash of phenomenon that are dovetailed by a particular perception. As a scientist, I'd be very careful about saying that chi is something that "hasn't been proven" and really hanging on to that like a dog with a bone.

The concept of "chi" may be archaic, but there might be something special behind the various veils of our syntax.

Humans, heh, you are one too eh.

 

[Uchinanchu]

6000 years of practice doesn't necessarily mean the archaic explanation for why the treatments work is correct. There is also a body of western medical research that shows that there are demonstrative, replicatible benefits from chinese medicine that utilize a chi meridian framework for explaning the effects i.e. acupuncture. That same research also shows that the effects of acupuncture are not 100% consistent with the TCM explanation. There are plenty of notable instances in which the effect is different than that claimed by the TCM practioner or that there is no effect at all. So, yes I would love to have more knowledgable people on here debating this, but no, your claim that they've got 6000 years so there's your 'proof' doesn't hold water.

I agree that it is not 100% affective, but neither is western medicine. It is only as good as the doctor, and his/her diagnosis. Honestly, how often have you gone to see a western doctor and been misdiagnosed? I myself have had both positive and negative results from TCM treatments, but no more so (or less) than that experienced when going to a western doctor.
As for my mention of the 6000 years of 'proof', what I meant was that they have had centuries worth of trial and error in the development of their medical practice, with an end result of undeniable success, so credit should be given where it is due.

 

[Archangel M]

Hmmm, when you think about it, everything is a perception. Reality is just what people agree upon. :angel:

Eh..the old "if a tree falls in the woods..." philosophy. While the way humans percieve reality is through our senses and experienced in the brain, the piano falling from the 33rd floor will squash each of us flat reagrdless of our varying opinion on "reality". Taking the "reality is as we percieve it" thing too far ignores the fact that "reality" .

It recalls the old zen koan of:

Shuzan held out his short staff and said: "If you call this as short staff, you oppose its reality. If you do not call it a short staff, you ignore the fact. Now what do you wish to call this?"

While the word/mental conception "short staff" is purely a construct humans use to frame their reality (it could just as easily be called a "horsefeather"), there is still something in the masters hand that can be used to hit the monk upside the head regardless of what its called. As a matter of fact Shuzan should be careful or the monk may just take the staff and hit him with it as a reply to his riddle.

The "Reality is just what people agree upon" statement, while probably agreeable to the zen master would still not be enough.....

 

[Bruno@MT]

Why is it that people don't believe in things that they can not see or touch?

You've got it the wrong way around. I fully accept the phenomenon. I just don't buy the explanation. For energy to affect something, there is a need for measurable interaction.

For example, I can lift something through mechanical force, or in some cases through EM force, but I can't just 'will' it to move through telekinesis.
Despite all the stories and arguments, as soon as a scientist and a camera are involved, all demonstrations of exotic events mysteriously fail to work.

But ignoring the con artists and fancy tickery for a moment, biophysics and mental processes are real, do influence the body, and have been scientifically established and reproduced.

Let me tell you a secret: the theory of relativity is NOT a description of reality. Neither is quantum mechanics. For that matter, once you get into QM, the idea of electrons as discrete entities with a finite size becomes absurb. Instead, they are MODELS which describe reality and enable the user to make predictions and conclusions, given a context to which said models can be applied.

Invisible QI energy does not exist as a scientifically measurable entity. But using the model to learn how to control you mind and body is a perfectly valid approach, just like biophysics and mental processes manipulation.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Hmmm, when you think about it, everything is a perception. Reality is just what people agree upon. :angel:

While perception is very important, it is not the same thing as reality.

Reality is that the earth is not flat, yet for thousands of years, everyone agreed that it was.

Reality may not be perceived properly, but there comes a point when it rears its head and forces itself upon those unwilling to accept it.

I have no doubt that George Dilman's student perceived that he could throw a chi ball and knock out a journalist from National Geographic. All of the other students certainly agreed that he could. If not, he never would have agreed to attempt it on film. And yet when he did, he found that he had nothing but a cheap parlor trick that only works on other students prepped by Dilman to fall on cue.

Actually, it was probably a very expensive parlor trick. The guy was one of Dilman's top students, so he most likely had a considerable investment in Dilman's organization.

That is the funny thing about reality: it often barges in at inconvenient times.

Daniel

 

[Ninjamom]

Let me tell you a secret: the theory of relativity is NOT a description of reality. Neither is quantum mechanics. For that matter, once you get into QM, the idea of electrons as discrete entities with a finite size becomes absurb. Instead, they are MODELS which describe reality and enable the user to make predictions and conclusions, given a context to which said models can be applied.

Repeated for emphasis.

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
What he said.

But here is where I see the major difference, and why I have pretty much written off chi/ki/qi as a viable model for use in martial arts practice. Consider the following two situations, each using a different 'model' for martial arts:

1) Joe Physicist is learning aikido. He learns the basic principles and begins to apply physics as a model. He understands that all the joint locks seem to work by isolating a small group of muscles, forcing an axis of rotation, and applying an opposing torque using a larger group of muscles. Using this principle, he is able to create dozens of new self-defense moves, joint locks, holds, and takedowns that he has never seen before.

2) Joe Chi Master is learning aikido. He believes that an entity called chi allows him to control and direct his thoughts and intentions, have greater endurance, and coordinate his physical movements, timing, and technique. He is not sure what chi is, and he cannot measure it. He cannot create a new self-defense technique he has never seen by using only his understanding of chi. All he can do is observe, when a particular technique he has already learned goes extremely well, that it must have been because of chi.

I hope that any unbiased observer can see that, whether chi exists or not, the first approach offers a superior model. The first approach can be used to predict and to create. The second can only offer observations of what has already happened.

 

[exile]

Hmmm, when you think about it, everything is a perception. Reality is just what people agree upon. :angel:

But the fact that they agree on it tells you that it's a different order of phenomenon than stuff that there is no such agreement on.

As Daniel says, we connect to the world via the senses. That's all it means when you say, everything is perception. The senses are computational in nature; they take in information from the outside and yield representations that correspond to what we see and hear. Look again at the illusory triangle I linked to earlier. Or the Ehrenstein illusion. Or the really, really eerie Fraser's Spiral illusion. In every case, there are specific properties of the visual cortex which reliably miscompute the results of the cleverly designed optical inputs and deliver a false message to the brain, corresponding to our misperception in each case.

Something similar happens with language. When someone speaks to you in your own native language, you hear breaks between the words. Everyone who does not have a measurably damaged neurophysiology and has acquired a first language (i.e., no Genies or Wild Children) hears those gaps, very short breaks in the sound stream. Except, they're not there. An acoustic spectrogram of continuous speech reveals that the flow of speech is indeed continuous. Everyone hears the final sound of cats and dogs as the same sound, yet those are exactly the same sounds that separate seal and zeal—the sole difference! They are phonetically distinct in a major way. Yet the form for the plural in English is perceived as acoustically a single sound, as mandated by the rules of English phonology, even though it's not. Ad infinitum.

So it's not really informative to say that everything is perception, any more than it's informative to say, well, everything in the universe is energy in one form or another. There are critical differences, and the major one is this: reality happens to you regardless of what your perception is. That piano falling on you from the 20th story doesn't give a rat's *** about your perception. If you hallucinate a bridge that's not there over a fifty foot gap between two buildings and try to walk across it, you're gonna be dead. Your reality may be different, but real reality is what counts, in the end.

 

[bluekey88]

I feel the need to take a slight tangent to address this whole "perception is reality" thing that keep popping up in these threads.

I don't know for certain, but I strongly suspect that the phrase comes from popular misinterpretation of psychology (hereafter referred to as pop psychology).

As a therapist, I've worked with some very clinically disturbed individuals. I work with people who see/here things that are not there, that hold delusional beliefs, that have very odd sensitivities to various stimulus in the environment. As their therapist, it is really improtant that I understand as best as I can how they percieve reality.

Why? because, in order to provide effective treatment, the first thing I need to establish is a strong therapeutic realtionship built on trust. from there, i can use the tools of my professions to act as an "agent of change" and help change their peceptions and behaviors to better match realioty 9or at the very least be less of a barrier to functioning in day to day life). If I go in and dismiss everything they say and just look at their behaviors as those of a "crazy person." We're not going to get anywhere. They won't trust me and I won;t be able to understand or empathise with them.

Most of the kids I work with have a significant trauma history. As a lrage male, I need to be very sensitive to my posture, my body language, expressions, tone of voice, etc. I may not mean to come off as threatening, but it can happen. From a therapeutic standpoint, it doesn't matter abotu my intentions as my client's perceptions are improtant in this context. I need to avoid adding or re-traumatizing them.

however, context is the key. I think pop psychology has gotten ahold of this idea of perceptions. it's been passed out through the self-help books, the gurus, the Dr. Phil's of the world. People now know that how they eprceive the world influences their behaviors. They know that this can affect how they function in the world. So, people run with the idea that "perception is reality" forgetting the all important fact that from a therapeutic perspective, ....misattributions (e.g. innaccurate perceptions) need to change or be accounted for for healthy psychological functioning. That's what alot of therapy is....reframing, challenging incongruent beliefs, modifying irrational schema, etc. in order to facilitate change.

So, saying "perception is reality" is important...if you are in the business of helping people to chnage their behaviors/thinking or you otherwise need to understand another person's behavior/thinking. Any thing else, reality is reality.

Peace.
Erik

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

There are critical differences, and the major one is this: reality happens to you regardless of what your perception is. That piano falling on you from the 20th story doesn't give a rat's *** about your perception. If you hallucinate a bridge that's not there over a fifty foot gap between two buildings and try to walk across it, you're gonna be dead. Your reality may be different, but real reality is what counts, in the end.

Just ask anyone who purchased 99.00 wallhangars and believed that they had a nihonto because of what some slick salesman or a write up in a Bud K catalogue told them. They were secure in their perception until they tried to either cut or perform kata with them and found that real reality involved a spot welded bolt for a tang.

Reality intruded in the form of the weld breaking and the blade taking flight, in some cases, terminating its flight by impaling a bystander.

Yes, this has happened.

Perception does not create reality. Reality influences perception.

Daniel

 

[JadeDragon3]

All I know is that the Chinese have been using the concept of chi in TCM for 100's of years. Wheather or not chi/ki exists, whatever the Chinese have been doing seems to work. As far as chi as an added energy when fighting I can attest to being on the recieving end of it's effect. I had a kung fu master hit me like a normal person would (such as a boxer) in the stomach while holding a phone book against my stomach for padding. The pain from the hit covered a large area. When he hit me again later (using the phone book again as padding) he said he was going to channel his chi through the phone book and penitrate my stomach just in a small area about the size of a silver dollar and as the force penitrated it would expand. The result was much more painful this time. The force actually felt like it entered my stomach and after about 2 or 3 inches inward the force started to expand as it penitrated deeper. You can believe this or not but it did happen and this kung fu master said this was a chi strike.

 

[Makalakumu]

Your reality may be different, but real reality is what counts, in the end.

Obviously (to me at least) my comment was more tongue in cheek then serious. In a lot of ways it comes down to semantics, when you say real, many people assume there is absolute certitude when it reality (hehe) it's just an assumption. Sure you can test this assumption and provide support, but that assumption could be wrong no matter how many tests you provide.

Absolute certainty ended for me when I took a course in modern physics (quantum mechanics - I still don't understand a fraction of what I was supposed to even though I managed to pull an A). Observers do strange things to our universe, things that are so absurd that they appear unreal. If you consider all of the permutations of the Young's Two Slit experiment, you'll understand what I mean.

I had a conversation with Elder999 about this very thing. If you are a lone observer and you are looking at the moon, you perceive that it is there. When you look away, there is also a chance that it is not there anymore. You just don't know. As much as it pissed me off at the time, he's right, you just don't know. After struggling with the math, there really (hehe) is a chance that it isn't there.

Yeah this all might be a silly mathematical conceit but quantum mechanics also is the most supported theory in the history of science. It's as real as anything we know and nothing is certain in quantum mechanics.

This doesn't really apply to this conversation because the phenomenon we are talking about is scaled so hugely. This is just an addendum to a smarmy comment I made tongue in cheek to shake things up.

IMO, Chi is an explanation that is valuable as a cultural artifact, but there are more accurate ways to describe the phenomenon that people experience as chi. It's interesting to read some of the papers where TCM methods are studied by western doctors. That'll shake your thoughts as to whether you think this explanation is still useful.

I am not going to consider people who think they can project their chi and do other crazy things. As far as I understand, there was never anything in a traditional understanding of the concept that said that those things are possible. Those things are the fantasy of fakes, frauds, and magicians.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I had a kung fu master hit me like a normal person would (such as a boxer) in the stomach while holding a phone book against my stomach for padding. The pain from the hit covered a large area. When he hit me again later (using the phone book again as padding) he said he was going to channel his chi through the phone book and penitrate my stomach just in a small area about the size of a silver dollar and as the force penitrated it would expand. The result was much more painful this time. The force actually felt like it entered my stomach and after about 2 or 3 inches inward the force started to expand as it penitrated deeper. You can believe this or not but it did happen and this kung fu master said this was a chi strike.

As one who is not skeptical of the existence of chi, I would not question your account. I have heard similar accounts before, and have no reason to doubt them.

But in such examples, the master isn't throwing chi balls or claiming to knock people out from across the room. They are focusing their energy into their punch, through an obstacle, and into a target.

I consider such examples the end result of:

Excellent punching technique
Excellent energy control
Excellent focus

When I say energy, I mean breath, physical power, and body mechanics. Given that the body carries an electic charge, I am open to the idea that an amount of current is also delivered, its deliver facilitated by the action of a powerful punch.

I am careful in how I define chi, mainly because I do not wish to give the idea that I subscribe to chi balls or no touch ko's.

And though your example of the phone book means that he did not touch you, per se, he still touched the phone book to direct his force through it to you.

Daniel

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I had a conversation with Elder999 about this very thing. If you are a lone observer and you are looking at the moon, you perceive that it is there. When you look away, there is also a chance that it is not there anymore. You just don't know. As much as it pissed me off at the time, he's right, you just don't know. After struggling with the math, there really (hehe) is a chance that it isn't there.

Interesting, but I would put money on a 100% chance that if I overrode all automatic safety mechanism and flew the space shuttle directly at the moon and closed my eyes, the moon would be there. And I would crash into the moon. If I survived and actually managed to get back to earth, I suppose I could try to sue some quantum physicist for postulating that there was any chance of the moon being "not there anymore" if I simply stopped looking at it.

Sad thing is, as moronic as such a lawsuit sounds, I stand a much greater chance of winning that than that of the moon ceasing to be there when I look away.

Daniel

 

[exile]

All I know is that the Chinese have been using the concept of chi in TCM for 100's of years.

People have also been navigating, using the 'fixed stars' and other assumptions about the cosmos that are demonstrably untrue, for thousands of years. The Romans were excellent navigators, using a Ptolmeic assumption about the structure of the heavens; and so for that matter were succeeding generations of sailors who would have laughed themselves to death had they heard of Copericus's idea that the earth revolves around the sun. All this serves to as support for the the latter idea? What kind of argument is this, JD3??

Wheather or not chi/ki exists, whatever the Chinese have been doing seems to work.

Since the issue that the OP thread raised is precisely the question of whether or not chi/ki exists (not that the OP gave us the least idea of just what it is whose existence is under debate; he's insisting the we argument about something which you can't identify unless you've experienced it firsthand, etc., lol), the part in bold is irrelevant. Nothing about the existence of chi/ki/Qi depends on that, any more than the Copernican vs. Ptolmeic-epicycle model of the solar system and the cosmos beyond hinges on the fact that the navigators who successfully navigated the seas and oceans of the world believed that the sun revolved around the earth, or was pulled across the heavens by Helios in a big chariot, or whatever, or that the earth rested on the back of a huge turtle, etc.

As far as chi as an added energy when fighting I can attest to being on the recieving end of it's effect. I had a kung fu master hit me like a normal person would (such as a boxer) in the stomach while holding a phone book against my stomach for padding. The pain from the hit covered a large area. When he hit me again later (using the phone book again as padding) he said he was going to channel his chi through the phone book and penitrate my stomach just in a small area about the size of a silver dollar and as the force penitrated it would expand. The result was much more painful this time. The force actually felt like it entered my stomach and after about 2 or 3 inches inward the force started to expand as it penitrated deeper.

Yeah. And when I had a bad sinus infection once, the pain in one of my own teeth was unbelievable (this has also happened to me when I've had a cold—though not nearly as bad—and other people I know have reported tooth pain from nasal tract infections). Had to be a toothache. It was a toothache, a pain in a tooth. But according to my dentist, there was nothing wrong with the tooth. Go get it looked at by your GP, he said, and I did, and got antibiotics for the bacterial infection, and Bob's your uncle. The subjective sensation of pain was real. The subjective identification of the source of the pain had nothing to do with its origins (check out http://www.atlantadentist.com/sinus_infection_tooth_ache.html to see just how common this problem is). Do you see what I'm getting at?

You can believe this or not but it did happen and this kung fu master said this was a chi strike.

I have no reason to doubt this happened. I have no reason to doubt the chap in question told you it was a chi strike, and did so because he believed that's what it was. And the point is... ?

 

[blindsage]

I agree that it is not 100% affective, but neither is western medicine. It is only as good as the doctor, and his/her diagnosis. Honestly, how often have you gone to see a western doctor and been misdiagnosed? I myself have had both positive and negative results from TCM treatments, but no more so (or less) than that experienced when going to a western doctor.
As for my mention of the 6000 years of 'proof', what I meant was that they have had centuries worth of trial and error in the development of their medical practice, with an end result of undeniable success, so credit should be given where it is due.

I haven't ever said that TCM practice is a load of crap, or not given credit where it's due, as a matter of fact, if you read what you quoted from me you will see that I said western science has agreed that TCM is doing much of what it claims to do. What I've called into question and what some western research has called into question, is whether or not the explanation for why it works is valid. I give TCM credit for being valid and effective. I don't, at this point, believe that chi meridians in the body explain its efficacy.

 

[Flying Crane]

I had a kung fu master hit me like a normal person would (such as a boxer) in the stomach while holding a phone book against my stomach for padding. The pain from the hit covered a large area. When he hit me again later (using the phone book again as padding) he said he was going to channel his chi through the phone book and penitrate my stomach just in a small area about the size of a silver dollar and as the force penitrated it would expand. The result was much more painful this time. The force actually felt like it entered my stomach and after about 2 or 3 inches inward the force started to expand as it penitrated deeper. You can believe this or not but it did happen and this kung fu master said this was a chi strike.

well, I don't know what that guy actually did, but I've been able to deliver similar strikes that are definitely NOT qi strikes, unless my qi was purely accidental and I was completey unaware of it.

I first encountered the phonebook test when I was studying wing chun. It's an interesting test, it enables the receiver to feel and experience the force of the blow, but at the same time the phone book protects him from actual injury (use a THICK phone book, something from a big city).

My Wing Chun sifu pulled out the yellopages and we conducted the test. I held the book to my chest, and he hit me using the kind of short range power that is developed thru Wing Chun practice. He's a pretty big guy and he'd been doing wing chun for some 35 years or so. When he hit me, it felt like my whole body had received a huge electrical jolt. I just felt deeply rattled, from head to toe. To my recollection, he never claimed he was using qi. Rather, he was just demonstrating the power that can be developed thru wing chun practice, and it was impressive.

I then took my turn, and he held the book. I elected to strike using a Tibetan White Crane method, and my sifu was interested in experiencing that since we had discussed it in the past and he was curious.

In White Crane, we use a very relaxed, full body pivot to drive our power out. I know that most systems marry the strike with the pivot of the body, but it's my belief that in White Crane we carry this to a greater extreme, in developing the technique. In fact, our entire system is based on this concept.

When I struck the phone book against his chest using only modest effort on my part, his eyes immediately glazed over, he staggered backwards and let out a groan. It took him a moment to shake it off, and he said that he literally felt the force of the blow penetrate into his torso like a spear, sort of "bounce" off his spine and drive down into his guts. He felt that it was one of the most tremendous strikes he'd ever felt, to the point where it was frightening. We are good friends now, but before he knew me well enough to judge my character, he actually went out of his way to caution me about ever using these techniques, because he felt they were really dangerous and scary, and someone with bad intentions could really be a danger with it.

When I attended my brother's wedding, an old highschool friend of his was in attendance. His friend had been training kungfu somewhere, and we compared some notes. We conducted the same test, and I hit with with a White Crane technique, thru the phone book. SImilar results to what my wing chun sifu felt. He said he had never been hit like that before.

If my qi had anything to do with this, I was completely unaware of it and I would never make the claim. I was simply using very efficient, high level physical technique in delivering my strike. My White Crane sifu actually says that Tibetan White Crane is definitely NOT an internal art. The way we practice and the way we move, he says, does not allow for the flow and cultivation of qi in the way an internal art like taiji does.

So in getting back to your experience, I will say this: it is definitely possible to generate tremendous power in delivering a strike, while remaining surprisingly relaxed, and it has little or nothing to do with qi. So again, I don't know what that sifu actually did in striking you, but this is the kind of story about which I remain skeptical. I would have to know more about HOW he struck you, before I would be willing to entertain the notion that it might have had something to do with qi.

Again, I'm a qi believer, but a skeptic when it comes to most claims.

 

[blindsage]

All I know is that the Chinese have been using the concept of chi in TCM for 100's of years. Wheather or not chi/ki exists, whatever the Chinese have been doing seems to work.

Absolutely. It does seem to work. How does that prove, either way, that the explanation for why it works is correct?

As far as chi as an added energy when fighting I can attest to being on the recieving end of it's effect. I had a kung fu master hit me like a normal person would (such as a boxer) in the stomach while holding a phone book against my stomach for padding. The pain from the hit covered a large area. When he hit me again later (using the phone book again as padding) he said he was going to channel his chi through the phone book and penitrate my stomach just in a small area about the size of a silver dollar and as the force penitrated it would expand. The result was much more painful this time. The force actually felt like it entered my stomach and after about 2 or 3 inches inward the force started to expand as it penitrated deeper. You can believe this or not but it did happen and this kung fu master said this was a chi strike.

That's great. I'm glad you had an experience to provide you with evidence that there's something there. But your personal experience is not evidence for anyone but yourself. You're still saying "I know it's true so why aren't you accepting it?" I'm not sure why you don't see the logic problem here. If you have enough personal experience to believe in it, that's perfectly fine, great even. That doesn't translate in any way into proof for anyone else. In addition, as exile said, because the master said it was a chi strike doesn't necessarily make it so. My old Kyokushin Karate instructors, who were very, very good fighters, with plenty of ring and street experience, use to say kung-fu styles were basically a joke for fighting. They had a lot more experience than me, and I generally trusted their opinions, but just because they said it was the case didn't make it so. And I have found through my own experience that they were incorrect.

 

[Makalakumu]

Here is a good thread on the existence of chi where I make a good case that at least part of the phenomenon is based on bio-electricity. I found a lot of good resources for this discussion and I think that these will add to everyone's understanding, including the skeptic.