Much of our attractions to certain natural settings are as much primoidal carry-overs as anything else.. lakes and waterbodies were where the food was.. lush forests were where the food was.. Yin/Yang characterists were the same as was needed to survive 10,000 years ago in tribal society.. The Chinese culture simply categorized and labeled these characteristics after noting they were still present is our psyche.. Most often QiGong, Feng Shui, sacred geometry, etc… are just re-occurring patterns in natural behavior.. (bonus points for Taoist tendency toward following natural patterns).. Those patterns that promoted good health (survivability) received more attention and subsequently more ritualization..
Ying/Yang characters,feng shui,qi-gong…Chinese culture labeling this stuff because it is still present in our psyche?..
Good patterns=survival…well,yes,yes…
I don´t mean to offend you but how do you invent this stuff?
I don´t mean to offend you but how do you invent this stuff?
LOL.. how could you offend me?.. rather, the question i would pose to you might be something like: I don’t mean to offend you but how do you so adroitly elude your own instincts?..
With so much emphasis on lineage, science, measurements, proofs, etc.. the simple things seem to get lost in our rush to label and quantify (“can’t see the trees for the Bushes” sort of thing <Bushes.. pun intended>).. things are what they are, the measurements and descriptions are merely abstractions of that which is.. where we differ (mostly), is some folks can accept things just as they are (natural), others need to have proof (measurement and labels) to believe that which they already “know” but don’t yet understand..
As for inventing.. i actually relied on anthropological, sociological and psychological studies and research for some of my previous commentary.. Aside from the obvious insecurities of those that need proof of what they “know”, may i inquire as to the motivation of your curiosity in the matter of " how do you invent this stuff?"
Thanks, as ever, for your open-handed generosity in helping with even the seemingly smallest or weirdest things. I knew that it all pointed towards something more important, and you’re showing me where that window of opportunity is…
FC-
I don’t think that a great deal of the subject matter within qiqong is amenable to scientific measure. But this doesn’t mean that there is no ‘truth’ to be observed within it. It can be more phenomonological truth than physics, though.
Perhaps the particular method used is incorrect if you are looking for ‘proofs’ but can’t find any? One would think that, as a scientist, one would exhaust different methodologies before discarding anything potentially valuable.
Do you, yourself, practice any qiqong? I’ve always been curious. If so, what is the worth that you, personally, feel that it has? This isn’t a trick question, I really just want to know.
I find odd actually that you´re talking that much about qi-gong.You see,what I first did was point out my idea about ?related? ?phenomena? that you asked about.
But since there we are,
I already agreed (see Christopher´s) that breathing exercises can be pretty good,what I don´t buy is all the excessive hodgy podgy.
I´m definitely not saying it´s worthless,to each their own,I prefer walking as an example over it and I feel it´s at least equal.
In this context,I´m not (anymore at least) looking for proofs for this or that,I consider myself to be aware of underlying factors already and things that some might want to consider outside of scientific grasp (even anomalies) but the simple fact goes that you can´t test non-falsifiable things,they´re better discarded.Translated:It´s not the method that is incorrect.This is not a hammer/nail situation either.
No,I do not practice.I have practiced and this is where I am.
It does not affect me much.
"´m definitely not saying it´s worthless,to each their own,I prefer walking as an example over it and I feel it´s at least equal.
In this context,I´m not (anymore at least) looking for proofs for this or that,I consider myself to be aware of underlying factors already and things that some might want to consider outside of scientific grasp (even anomalies) but the simple fact goes that you can´t test non-falsifiable things,they´re better discarded.Translated:It´s not the method that is incorrect.This is not a hammer/nail situation either. " Former Castleva
Qigong is not only for the physical, but most importantly for the spirit. Spirit may be a 'non falsifiable’thing as far as looking at another person, but we can test our own, and see how the quality of our lives improved. My attitudes on almost anything have improved scince I’ve started practicing qigong. You could not have told me I was missing anything from life before, but now I see just how much I was not appreciating! To each their own, true, but qigong is not just a physical discipline, I define spiritual as the nature of a person all around their spirit, beyond moods, it doesnt have to be something greatly mistical or intangible. I think if I only focused on Qigong as physical exercise, I would miss the best benefits of what it has to offer.
I cannot comment on anyone´s personal experience,not to even mention criticizing such!
I myself am not a believer in “spirit”,it´s a philosophical question anyway imo.
I still think it boils down to what you describe as what,qi-gong is spiritual for you,that´s great.
FC
not trying to critisise you or your opinions, just trying to let ya know how I see it. Qigong was developed to aid in spiritual development (whether Buddhist or Taoist), the point isnt just to gather qi, its to use qi to nourish shen (spirit). I consider dropping a couple dollars in the homeless guys cup or feeding the birds qigong.
Whether qi-gong would aid in that,I cannot say but I will have to note that I think the idea you´re giving about qi-gong is simplified.
There are various kinds of schools of qi-gong,those “spiritual” ones of certains sects for “buddahood”,“enlightment”,we´ve got scholarly,martial,medical etc.
I suppose the basics are similar in ways but there are great differences,don´t you think?
certains sects for “buddahood”,“enlightment”,we´ve got scholarly,martial,medical etc.
Former Castleva
They all came from spiritual practice!
I suppose the basics are similar in ways but there are great differences,don´t you think?
Former Castleva
There are differences in goals and methods, however the original goals were quite similar. In Bone Marrow Nei Kung by Mantak Chia he tells a story of a chi weight lifter (the Iron Crotch)that lifted much weight from his genitals. His goal became to show it off, and he died young. The practice is great for longevity if only a couple of pounds are used to stimulate pulling the sexual energy up to the higher centers, the goals originally werent to lift as much as freakin possible! Martial Qigong was started by monks, cultivating peace, the essence of spirituality!
"In Bone Marrow Nei Kung by Mantak Chia he tells a story of a chi weight lifter (the Iron Crotch)that lifted much weight from his genitals. His goal became to show it off, and he died young. The practice is great for longevity if only a couple of pounds are used to stimulate pulling the sexual energy up to the higher centers, "
It is this kind of stuff,you know,which makes me laugh at this.
I said it wasn’t a trick question, and it wasn’t. I didn’t want to respond for fear that you would take it wrongly.
I appreciate the goals and ideals of science very much. I also see where it is limited… we can talk about light reflecting off of a girl, for instance, travelling at such a velocity, entering the eye of a man, winding its way through the visual system, the image being transferred and translated to chemical reactions, neurons fring in certain sequences, and physical qualia in result. But we can’t say from science why he loves her.
Indeed from a scientific standpoint, we might say: high heart rate, wobbly pulse, rapid breathing, etc. He’s having a heart attack. No no no. Science screwed the pooch.
Another thing thats not falsifiable: quality of life. If you throw that out, what results? Is that a good thing?
It takes a different viewpoint to see whats going on here, in the above instance, even if there are real-world results. Some of the ?un-related? ?phenomena? of qiqong is of that type of reasoning. That was my only point… and possibly a slice of bodhitree’s as well.
By the way- turns out you sweat an awful lot… breeze from the water freezes the sweat, leading to uneven heating of the body. Could make you sick, I suppose, or improve your immunity. Nice time, though, on the whole. I’m thinking to work my way up to more time rather than push it.
"I appreciate the goals and ideals of science very much. I also see where it is limited… we can talk about light reflecting off of a girl, for instance, travelling at such a velocity, entering the eye of a man, winding its way through the visual system, the image being transferred and translated to chemical reactions, neurons fring in certain sequences, and physical qualia in result. But we can’t say from science why he loves her. "
It´s a matter of viewpoint.
You did read evo.psych.,right?
"Indeed from a scientific standpoint, we might say: high heart rate, wobbly pulse, rapid breathing, etc. He’s having a heart attack. No no no. Science screwed the pooch. "
I´m not falling for this…
“By the way- turns out you sweat an awful lot… breeze from the water freezes the sweat, leading to uneven heating of the body. Could make you sick, I suppose, or improve your immunity. Nice time, though, on the whole. I’m thinking to work my way up to more time rather than push it.”
What? I tripped again.
:o
"I said it wasn’t a trick question, and it wasn’t. I didn’t want to respond for fear that you would take it wrongly. "
As for inventing.. i actually relied on anthropological, sociological and psychological studies and research for some of my previous commentary.. Aside from the obvious insecurities of those that need proof of what they “know”, may i inquire as to the motivation of your curiosity in the matter of " how do you invent this stuff?"
Maybe, I suggest humbly once again, your methods need to be expanded. The research from this angle has not been done yet. Science records and interprets what it finds- it doesn’t say anything about what it hasn’t looked at yet or hasn’t found. When science does find new eveidence, it adjusts it’s story…
