From: Frank@mindlink.bc.ca (Frank I. Reiter)
Subject: Re: ki and science
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 18:23:57 GMT

> Peter Capell writes:
>
> >tremendously valuable - without science you would likely be far to busy
> >trying to maintain a subsistance level existence to study MA, and
> certainly
> >there would be no usenet, or computers, or electricity...
>
> I think we'd be much better martial artists in a "primitive" society
> without
> any notion of science at all.  Indeed, I believe the Chinese have always
> been
> better martial artists without scientific interference.

I think that in general it has also been more important to them to become
skilled martial artists.  If your belief that the Chinese are better martial
artists is correct (I won't dispute it) then I believe it is probably due to
their culture rather than any lack of technology.

> >This is certainly true of many "educated" westerners, but let's not
> confuse
> >the science with the scientists, nor even judge an entire group by the
> >attitudes of a portion thereof.
>
> You're right, I'm expressing a prejudice.  But hell, test my hypothesis
> that
> you will be shunned if you take the notion of chi seriously in 99% if all
> American scientific institutions.  If you work in one, try it out.

I don't work in one, but believe you are right.  That is a reflection on the
people involved and the culture at those institutions.  Again, lets not
confuse the workers with the work.

>   Propose a
> study to verify the existence of chi in your home institute and see what
> happens.  My presupposition is that you will be ridiculed.  It is highly
> predictable.

If I wander across the street to where a new school is being built and talk
with those people about chi flowing out the ends of my fingers I will be just
as ridiculed there.  This is a facet of western society, not just of
scientists.

> >Have I misunderstood your "dubious value" statement?
>
> No you haven't.  Science has its roots in being able to answer meaningful
> questions about the universe--meaningful here is defined as that which will
> give us useful information in determining our lives in the world.

I suggest that pure science strives to understand how the universe works, and
applied science tries to use that knowledge to enhance our lives.  Without
science and technology my wife and daughter would probably be dead, and the
odds of my ever having encountered a Chinese person (and hence the knowledge
they have developed, in my case Tai Chi) would be essentially nil.  Science
has very much enhanced my life.

> I see myself as a traveller on a ball of dirt that is flying through the
> universe.  I have <=100 years to live--a very very short period of time.
> Science will never tell me anything meaningful relative to my life or
> death.

Ask your coworkers whether it is the goal of science to give your life
meaning.  To the best of my knowledge no person has ever been able to answer
"The" question for another - we must each deal with that ourselves.

Frank.
--
___________________________________________________________________
Frank I. Reiter                 Internet: Frank@mindlink.bc.ca
MIND LINK! Communications Corp. Surrey, British Columbia, Canada
Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts,soc.culture.pakistan