From: Kim Holburn <kim@csc.canberra.edu.au>
Subject: Re: A western scientific look at Ki
X-Xxmessage-Id: <A75642A474010743@taijiquan.canberra.edu.au>
X-Xxdate: Thu, 17 Dec 92 22:43:48 GMT
Organization: University of Canberra
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d13
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 92 03:26:52 GMT

In article <1992Dec4.150901.25927@medtron.medtronic.com> Terry Pinotti,
tp0001@srilanka writes:
>I feel that the discussion of Ki from a scientific standpoint vs the
>spiritualistic standpoint is BULL. Ki is just not understood yet. Just
>because it is not understood is no reason to give it spiritualistic
>meaning only, nor is it reason to not try to understand it
>scientifically.
>
>The mother that lifts the car off her trapped child is just using ki
>without training first. It was once said, mid 1800's) that no one
>would every be able to travel faster than 20 miles per hour. It was
>also once considered impossible to do a four minute mile. That was
>until one man did it and removed all the mystery from it, and then
>everyone started doing it.
>
>I have found no aspect of Ki to be unexplainable in the realm of using
>ones mind and body to its full potential without the hinderance of
>what others think is possible.
>

Just some thoughts here. As an acupuncturist and MA I have some
experience of chi. I think some important points have been missed here.
The concept of chi is a different paradigm to western science. This
doesn't make chi some mystical fluid or vibration that flows invisibly
through things (and that could be measured with a "chi meter") but
involves a different way of looking at the world. The archetypal mother
lifting the car off her children story shows what we are (physically)
capable of, as does the story of the adult male chimpanzee who can tear a
human's arm off.  
Now none of this explains some of the more intricate parts of the theory
and practice of traditional chinese medicine, but I don't think it is
necessarily possible or useful to explain it all. Every movement anyone
makes has "chi". Chi is not some supernatural force.

As for science and narrow-mindedness, well I think it is essential to
have a system of thought that requires ideas to be proved (more or less)
or at least allows any part of the system of ideas to be disproved.
Having read some history and known fundamentalist christians and radical
feminists I have seen what happens when people take up ideas without
subjecting them to criticism and proof. 

+----------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
|   Kim Holburn              |   Internet : kim@csc.canberra.edu.au    |
|   Computer Services Centre |                                         |
|   University of Canberra   |   Phone    : (06)201 2203, (06)201 2401 |
|   PO Box 1 Belconnen       |                                         |
|   ACT  Australia           |   Fax      : (06)201 5074               |
+----------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
|     born again and again and again and again and again buddhist      |
|                    well... in a previous life anyway  :-)            |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts