Ki is a hoax

[tellner]

There is some TCM which is worth a second, third and twenty third look, especially the vast wealth of herbal knowledge. But "TCM works" is simply not true. We simply know more now about how the body works at every level from the gross anatomical to the basic biochemical than we did thousands of years ago. Eating a cucumber marinated in your own urine will not cure snakebite. The spleen is not the Master Governing Organ and so on.

Traditional Medicine from Spain to Samarkand had centuries upon centuries of results showing that the Four Humors and Four Elements were a rock-solid foundation for medical theory. But the Scientific Revolution gave us the tools to better investigate these processes. If an honest, non-nationalistic examination of other antique therapies shows that there is verifiable, repeatable value in them well and good. That goes double if we can create a robust theoretical understanding. And I mean that in the strict scientific sense. But until then I'm not willing to bow at any altar, especially if the idol on it is inscribed with "I have not had an original thought in 3000 years. Worship me." That applies to Chinese, Ayurvedic, Islamic, Native American or any other corpus which is making life or death decisions about my corpus.

 

[jks9199]

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

Are you certain than anything persists when you're not directly observing it? Probably not. One of the reasons babies love peek-a-boo is because you GO AWAY when they can't see you; they don't understand what most of us kind of take for granted -- that the world persists when we're not looking at it. For those who have read Heinlein, I recall that in at least Stranger In a Strange Land he had "Fair Witnesses" or something like that who, through strict & intensive training, learn to report EXACTLY and faithfully what they observe. Hold an apple up, and they'll tell you that the side facing them appears to be an apple but unless they can somehow examine it and confirm it -- they won't say it's an apple.

The thing is... that's just not a practical way to be. I have to assume that the people around me continue to exist when I'm not looking at them -- and that they'll do things I need them to when I'm not there to see it happen.

Is there some sort of spiritual energy associated with human beings? Yeah. I've seen enough dead people to know that there is a qualitative (though not quantitative) difference between a living person and a corpse. Can that energy or spirit be manipulated or used for physiological benefit? Maybe. Can people intentions hurt me? Yes; anyone who's experienced that hateful stare or being with someone who just saps your energy by simply being around them can attest to that. Can it be used as a weapon to manipulate in a way that can be defined as different than simply what most LE trainers refer to as "command presence?" I don't know. But if you're going to claim you can do incredible things, like knock me over instantly with a "chi ball" or a no-touch knockout... Well, you need to give some pretty good proof. And not something that'll end with a claim that "well, maybe they put their tongue on the roof of their mouth and pushed down with their big toe..."

 

[Archangel M]

Can people intentions hurt me? Yes; anyone who's experienced that hateful stare or being with someone who just saps your energy by simply being around them can attest to that. Can it be used as a weapon to manipulate in a way that can be defined as different than simply what most LE trainers refer to as "command presence?" I don't know. But if you're going to claim you can do incredible things, like knock me over instantly with a "chi ball" or a no-touch knockout... Well, you need to give some pretty good proof. And not something that'll end with a claim that "well, maybe they put their tongue on the roof of their mouth and pushed down with their big toe..."

That is a great point. To me it brings to mind the question of the "power of intention" being an "energy" or a psychological phenomena within the observer. Humans are social animals and as such we have developed heightened sensitivity to facial expressions, tone of voice and signals of emotions. The "sensing danger"..."sensing intent" is more a sub-conscious reaction to these signals vs some mystical energy explination.

I believe that there are some cultures that express their displeasure, anger etc. differently than the way we do here in the states. Id wager that in those cases we probably wouldnt experience the same "sensitivity" as we would to signals we are used to. The fact that I can give my cat the "death stare" and he could care less shows that its a human phenomena and not some "force"....The "no-touch" stuff is all about psychology, group-think, social pressure and the like.

If there is any "real power" out there its in manipulating human behavior..politicians, the media, dictators and magicians have been doing it for milennia.

 

[K-man]

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.

For an example of someone else who hits with 'ki' look at Mikhail Ryabko.
An expert practitioner who makes great use use of biomechanics and something else? An interesting part of this video is the use of the sword. Much of Aikido also came from the sword. The punch you often see demonstrated by Mikhail is 1:10 into the video.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=351626957200966617

 

[blindsage]

He hits with ki? Really? Does he claim that?

 

[K-man]

To all who have contributed to this thread I give my heatfelt thanks. About 27 members contributed their thoughts, some in great depth. I have just re-read the entire thread to achieve some sort of closure. If I have misrepresented or misquoted anybody I apologise but I have selected a few lines from across the posts that I believe represent the positions of those who contributed to the discussion. In the scheme of things the 'abstainers' could be 'maybe' but did not really show an inclination either way.
For me it is now time to move on. :asian:

(10) FOR

K-man: I believe ki exists. I just don't know what it is.
Twin Fist: I don't know what it is, and I certainly don't understand it, but I have absolute faith that it exists, I have seen it. And felt it.
Bruno@MT: I believe in ki, kuji, and all those things as systems that you can use to have control of your body by taking over the automatic processes. 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.
Jadecloud Alchemist: Prove Ki exist no problem. Ki simply means energy in Japanese and Q is Chinese(However CHI is read in Japanese as Blood were in Chinese Blood is read Xue) the you can read into that word as much as you want but simply means energy thats it.
Daniel Sullivan: I consider 'ki' to be the exercise of control over one's breathing and heart-rate. The ability to do this effectively enable you to do things that a regular person cannot do. Personally, I believe that 'Ki' or 'Chi' exists, but the debate is in what the nature of ki or chi is. I define it as the energy within the human body, and the control of it allows us to maximize our efforts by using that energy more efficiently.
Flying Crane: I myself do believe in qi, but I cannot state with strong certainty that I have "felt" it or experienced it in a clear way. I'm a qi believer, but a skeptic when it comes to most claims.
Himura Kenshin:I personally view ki as the force of one's intention. I think ki is merely the manifestation of a person's will power.

Newy085: I believe that ki is more focus or spirit (as in fighting spirit). The ability to centre your mind and body. I believe it is reach through extreme focus, putting your whole mind and body about reaching a single outcome.
JadeDragon3: I believe in ki (chi in chinese martial arts) exists. Chi/ki is a internal energy that can not be seen. 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.
Maunakumu: 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.


(2) MAYBE

Blind Sage: I don't know if 'chi/qi/ki' is a legitimate 'thing' or not, I continue to withhold my judgement. I'm open to the idea of Qi, but as with all things I'm a skeptic.
jks9199: Interesting challenge. But it can't be done. I've "pulled" or "frozen" people using something. It's not a big effect -- but I've been on both sides. It happens. I don't claim that it's ki; I don't know what it is and I've not been very successful teaching it to others. It's very likely and very possible that it's simply the result of subtle psychological manipulation.

(4) AGAINST

Archangel M: I wouldnt call it a "hoax" that implies that its was fabricated for nefarious purposes. I think its a "belief" and you all are free to believe it. I just think its by far more "faith" than science. Prove the non-existance of Leprechauns.
Empty Hands: The only reliable way of perceiving this reality is through rigorous empirical testing. Ki does not meet this standard.
Bluekey88: I cannot disprove the existence of Ki. however, I've not seen a credible demonstration of it that couldn’t be more easily explained by something else. I used to really believe in the ki explanations....I don't now.
Ninjamom: 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'.

(7) ABSTAIN (No opinion stated)

Feeder of Trolls: I ask that you respect my skepticism as I cannot see it, feel it, or otherwise witness it and I have only your unproven and untested word that 'ki' is real. Skeptics, myself included, often feel that unproven statements are best not repeated for fear that those who are not skeptics will believe them without proof.
Sparky12: Wow, is this a hot topic or what? IMO, to those who have not experienced chi, it does not exist. To those that have experienced it, it is unmistakable, and does exist. I don't think either side will ever convince the other.
Geezer: If you have a reasonably high level of skill and can do a few cool martial stunts, your business will be way better if you explain these techniques in terms of chi or ki than if you resort to not-so-mysterious attempts at explaining things in terms of everyday laws of physics.
Superkin: Does Ki exist? The awkward answer to that is "It depends"
Uchinanchu: I was under the impression that the Chinese medical profession has roughly six thousand years worth of 'proof' with the development of all the treatments that are still used today, even amoung many western taught M.D.s
JBrainard: So, if a marital artist uses what appears to be Ki, it doesn't really matter what "Ki" is. Is it technique, mindset, spiritual powers? Who cares. If you can use the model that is Ki to enhance your martial art, more power to you.
Redantstyle: like they say, 'martial arts is ninety percent from the neck up'
Xue Sheng: Who cares? And this is as pointless as the MMA vs TMA stuff. If you believe or don't believe you can't argue with a stone is will always be a stone.

NATURAL EXPLANATION

Infidel: Here is my shortened version of what I feel Ki/Chi is. I have no scientific proof one way or another and I am not sure how I would go about geting it, since we are talking about a "spiritual" item. My take is that back in the day that the ancient Chinese and Indian mystics were onto something that well ahead of their time, nerve impulses.

FENCE SITTERS (Said a lot but neither for or against)
Exile: It isn't a thread which ki-skeptics have the slightest reason to avoid... and I'm pretty sure that we're not going to avoid it.
(Sorry Exile I have no idea what you think.. You said NOTHING either way in all those posts.)

HUMORIST
Carol Kaur: I know Chi exists. I found it at a Filipino grocery near Boston.

JUNK (Just that)
Tellner: This is one of those times when you need to take your ***-whipping like a little man, admit that you were wrong and move on. Otherwise your next ploys will be personal attacks. From there it just gets ugly.


:asian:

 

[tellner]

Nope K-man. Let's call it by its correct name: Telling you unpleasant truths you need to know.

 

[exile]

K, if after what I've posted you haven't been able to figure out that my position is just that neither you nor anyone else has made a case for Ki—that the burden of proof was on you and you haven't even begun to meet it—then I really have to question the value of any of the summaries you've included here. One more time: as was stated at the beginning: you're claiming there's something called ki, and so the burden of proof is on you to support that claim. You've offered nothing remotely like a reason to accept the existence of ki; all you've done is claim that you perceive something out there and that in turn means we need to accept that there's something out there. You've carefully avoided confronting any of the basic methodological points raised against those assumptions—especially, your 'perception is reality' fallacy. I seem to recall that early on, someone tried to point out to you the logical incoherence of framing a problem in terms of proving a negative, but you didn't ever really... um, get it. So I'm not surprised that you really didn't understand just how damaging to your own position Daniel's observations were, or some of the other people whose views you seem to have confused with support for your own. Maybe it would help if you went back and read everyone's comments just a teeny bit more carefully. You know, really tried to take in what they were saying? I think it would do no end of good for your understanding of just what most people in the thread have been trying to tell you. Just a thought!

Again: my position is that you have failed to make a case that would stand up in even a very relaxed court. And I'm pretty sure you know that too. As to why you chose to misrepresent my comments... well, I've a pretty good idea, and no, your pre-emptive apology isn't really of any interest to me. What you're up to here is fairly transparent to the rest of us. Want to do a summary of people's positions on whether you actually constructed any sort of coherent argument on behalf of your assertions about ki, or the rest of reality for that matter? No, I didn't think so!

And if the best you can do is ask us to take your word for it, well... :lol:

 

[JadecloudAlchemist]

nor anyone else has made a case for Ki

Really care to read my posts again. I have provided proof of the existance of Qi in this thread and other threads. I have provided sources and break down of the Kanji/Hanzi of the word and provided a translation of the word.

 

[bluekey88]

Really care to read my posts again. I have provided proof of the existance of Qi in this thread and other threads. I have provided sources and break down of the Kanji/Hanzi of the word and provided a translation of the word.

I have read your posts. You have given evidence of phenomenon, but no substantial proof that the phenomenon are due to ki (as opposed to some other explanation).

Peace,
Erik

 

[JadecloudAlchemist]

I have read your posts. You have given evidence of phenomenon, but no substantial proof that the phenomenon are due to ki (as opposed to some other explanation).

Ok again Qi simply means ENERGY thats it. I explained many times before that the Kanji/Hanzi for Qi/Ki literal meaning is the steam of cooked rice. In the Japanese use of the word by native speakers is ENERGY. In Chinese use of the word again it means ENERGY. You say Geothermal energy Chinese say Di Qi(earth's energy)

You say Weather Chinese say Tian Qi(Heaven's energy)

You say Human Bioelectric Chinese say Ren Qi(human energy)

You say DNA Chinese say Yuan Jing/Yuan Qi

You say sperm Chinese say Jingi

You say vitality Japanese say Genki.
In essence because the Japanese and Chinese do not speak English before they used Chinese and Japanese and wrote in Kanji/Hanzi they used Qi to describe our modern word energy What do you want them to say you want them to speak English? I find it humorus to tell me what Ki/Qi is or is not since I can read Kanji and Hanzi. I am telling you what it means I can break it down by radical on the Kanji/Hanzi for you. I can give you the literal meaning,The modern usage of the word,its western translation. I prove Qi exist you want proof of that all you have to do is look at the word energy and fit it in with science. No mystery.

 

[exile]

Really care to read my posts again. I have provided proof of the existance of Qi in this thread and other threads. I have provided sources and break down of the Kanji/Hanzi of the word and provided a translation of the word.

I have read your posts. You have given evidence of phenomenon, but no substantial proof that the phenomenon are due to ki (as opposed to some other explanation).

Peace,
Erik

What Erik said, JCA. You have provided no evidence for the existence of anything; rather, you've given illustrations of some experience you've had, and then mistakenly argued that the experience itself is evidence for the interpretation of that experience you prefer. No sale. You haven't even come close to providing a plausible case, let alone proof.

I have to say that this kind of failure in reasoning, which the OPer also committed consistently, is probably a pretty good clue to the reason why people who 'believe in ki' get such a cool, skeptical response from everyone but other believers: the evidence case is made so badly. If you want to persuade someone of something, the first thing you have to do is identify what it is that you want to persuade them of. Then you have to provide replicable evidence—none of this 'I have this sensation and it's really clear what's going on, and if you don't ever get the same sense, that's really too bad' blather that's so common—for what you're advocating. And you have to show that familiar, well-understood mechanisms aren't sufficient to account for it. Neither you, JCA,nor the OPer, offered even one of the items on the list. And please, let's cut the... uh, rationalization that all you're saying is that Qi means 'energy'. When you talk about Qi in the MAs, you're not talking about heat, or the capacity to do work, or anything like that. You know as well as I do that the OP wasn't talking about change in momentum when he started this thread, so let's get serious, eh?

I hate to have to say it but, as Tellner said, you guys need to hear some unpleasant truths, chief of which is that the main effect of your combined posts is to confirm the skeptics in their opinion that the whole thing is ballyrot. If this is the best you-all can come up with, I think most people are going to relegate the whole ki thing to an area shared with the New Years' Day psychics' predictions in the National Enquirer and the Victorian spiritualists at their sceances—their accounts of the ghosts and spirits they summoned were every bit as convincing and impressive as your 'evidence' for Ki. :shrug:

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Are you certain than anything persists when you're not directly observing it? Probably not.

Probably not? Actually, absolutely. I am 100% certain that my car exists in the parking lot while I am in the building. If I were to find that it was not there, I would report it stolen. I may or may not get the car back, but I would be absolutely certiain that the car still 'exists' somewhere, either as a complete Pontiac or as having been broken down into parts and sold.

If a meteor falls from the sky and vaporizes my car, leaving nothing but a huge crater, then the constituent molecules that made up my car still exist; they have simply been altered in their form. And the crater with the smoking hot chunk of space rock in the middle provides the explanation as to why my car is no longer a viable conveyance. But the car did not simply cease to exist due to cecation of my observance of it.

If the moon ceases to exist simply because we cannot see it, then we would experience the effects of the moon's sudden disappearance (as I recall, the moon has some affect on our tides). We may not see the moon, but its mass and accompanyign gravity still produces an effect.

One of the reasons babies love peek-a-boo is because you GO AWAY when they can't see you; they don't understand what most of us kind of take for granted -- that the world persists when we're not looking at it. For those who have read Heinlein, I recall that in at least Stranger In a Strange Land he had "Fair Witnesses" or something like that who, through strict & intensive training, learn to report EXACTLY and faithfully what they observe. Hold an apple up, and they'll tell you that the side facing them appears to be an apple but unless they can somehow examine it and confirm it -- they won't say it's an apple.

So, a baby thinks that you cease to exist and a fiction author wrote about people who cannot confirm an apple to be an apple without further examination. True of babies and Heinlein is a widely read author, but that does not change the fact that physical objects do not simply cease to exist simply because nobody is looking at them.

The thing is... that's just not a practical way to be.

Neither practical nor accurate.

I have to assume that the people around me continue to exist when I'm not looking at them -- and that they'll do things I need them to when I'm not there to see it happen.

I have absolute certainty that the people around me continue to exist if I am not looking at them. If they cease to exist, it is because they have either a) left the area or b) died, in which case their body may still be in the area, depending upon whether or not it has been taken away by medical personnel, in which case I find out that the person has died.

As for them doing the things that I need them to do, that is dependent upon their competency, integrity, and no unforseen events that would prevent them doing what I need them to do. But make no mistake, dead or alive, they still exist in my absense, just as I still exist in theirs.

The tree in the forest still falls, still moves the same volume of air in the same frequencies, whether or not an observer is there to hear it. The 'sound' is how our eardrums respond to that air movement and how our brain interprets the signal that it receives. If nobody is there to hear it, then the frequency of the air movment is never converted into that signal. But the phenomenon of air movement that produces audible frequencies still occurs.

Daniel

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I have to say that this kind of failure in reasoning, which the OPer also committed consistently, is probably a pretty good clue to the reason why people who 'believe in ki' get such a cool, skeptical response from everyone but other believers: the evidence case is made so badly. If you want to persuade someone of something, the first thing you have to do is identify what it is that you want to persuade them of. Then you have to provide replicable evidence

This pretty much sums up the divide. Since ki, qi chi, qui, or anyother permutation of the word is seldom defined by the proponents, who themselves often admit that they do not have a full understanding of what it is, it is difficult to formulate a convincing case for its existence: if you cannot define it, how can you convince me of its existence?

The lack of replicable results that cannot be attributed to more mundane explanations does not help either.

As I said before, I believe in Ki, but I define it as biophysics and metabolic control, not anything mystical, and not anything that does not have an English translation that I could use instead. I will admit that ki is a whole lot easier to type than biophysics and metabolic control, but any time saved in typing is lost in explaining how I define ki.

Daniel

 

[thardey]

I never use the word "Ki" in training. I use the phrase "Kinetic Energy."

1/2 Mass * Velocity^2 = Kinetic Energy

Being able to separate Kinetic Energy from Momentum allows me to reproduce some of the effects of "Ki."

I know "board breaking" is not allowed as an example, but what about breading marble slabs? It's not done by "pushing through" -- it's done by setting up vibrations in the slab which cause it to break.

In other words, it's a parlor trick. If you've ever held a slab that's been broken in this way, you would swear that some sort of supernatural effect was used to break it. As the holder, you don't experience any momentum of the strike, all you experience is the result of the slab falling apart in your hands. If it's done wrong, (hit off-center) you experience the sensation of the dispersion of energy, which can also feel almost supernatural.

But I've learned to do it -- it's roughly the same physics of "breaking" the rack of pool balls. Very little mass with high speed, transferring all of it's energy to the target at the precise moment of impact.

I can make my strikes "penetrate" through a heavy bag, that people can feel on the other side, without moving the bag at all -- that's utilizing kinetic energy to the fullest. It also feels very unnatural to those who don't know the trick.

I can see how people would use a supernatural explanation for some of this stuff, if you don't know the physics behind it, and I don't think they're out to be frauds, I just think they are ascribing the efficient use of energy to the wrong source.

I've also been helped by acupuncture, but the practicioner also didn't use the word "Ki." He just talked about manipulating the brain on a subconscious level by stimulating certain nerve points. It wasn't a mystical thing to him at all, and neither to me. He also thought that some kind of sensitivity to electromagnetic fields played a part.

I've also experienced the "hot hands" trick -- but the karate instructor who showed me believed it was in the subconscious control and sensitivity of blood flow, which caused a certain sensation.

So, I don't doubt the "experiences" of ki -- I've had them, and been able to reproduce them, but without any sort of spiritual connection.

BTW, as most of you know, I am a very strong believer in supernatural things, having defended Christianity and the Bible many times in the philosophical section, but my experiences with the manipulation of "Ki" does not fit into those types of religious experiences.

 

[Archangel M]

I hear ya. As if the "natural world" (science/physics/etc) isnt wonderful, mysterious and powerful enough in itself?

I think that at the bottom of this (for us non-orientals) is an element of "anti-westernism" and maybe a touch of self-loathing. Us resource gobbling, earth-warming, imperialistic westerners and our sciences and philosophies are bourgeois...being "eastern" is more in tune with nature and "the way of the universe".

 

[Empty Hands]

I prove Qi exist you want proof of that all you have to do is look at the word energy and fit it in with science. No mystery.

This is pretty much the most worthless form of proof one could attempt to provide. Why? It is disingenuous. Yes, energy exists. But you know very well that when martial artists speak of "qi" they aren't thinking of steam coming off of cooked rice or geothermal energy. They are thinking of a form of energy distinct from anything described by science, that can accomplish effects science cannot explain.

That sort of energy is not proved by "proving" to us that steam comes off of cooked rice.

 

[Archangel M]

This is pretty much the most worthless form of proof one could attempt to provide. Why? It is disingenuous. Yes, energy exists. But you know very well that when martial artists speak of "qi" they aren't thinking of steam coming off of cooked rice or geothermal energy. They are thinking of a form of energy distinct from anything described by science, that can accomplish effects science cannot explain.

That sort of energy is not proved by "proving" to us that steam comes off of cooked rice.

Exactly. If Ki is just the bodys "energy pathways" (aerobic and anaerobic) then we are all better off developing them through exercise and physical conditioning vs. mysterious "internal manipulations". A number of "Ki masters" I have seen seem to prefer the less labor intensive method.

 

[Makalakumu]

I'm just curious, what phenomenon are attributed to chi? Are there not analogues for these phenomenon in Science? Let's not discuss chi-balls or any other kind of nonsense. There are real things that are attributed to chi and it is my belief that every single one is something that can be explained by science.

For example, here's my list.

Rooting - body mechanics and stability.
Accupuncture or accupressure - bio-electricity or Placebo
Light force KO - Neurologic or Physiologic manipulation
Increased Health - exercise and/or circulation improvement
Increased mental focus - meditation/NLP
Kinetic linking - body mechanics/physical training

What else could be covered under the chi umbrella? Is there anything that doesn't conform other then the outright fake or fraudulent claims?

 

[Empty Hands]

What else could be covered under the chi umbrella? Is there anything that doesn't conform other then the outright fake or fraudulent claims?

Reiki.