Talk:Taoist tai chi

message: We have to be careful not to inadvertantly imply things about other schools in articles. We can say that Moy said that other styles are competitive, but we can't say that other styles are competitive. Some are, some aren't. Most traditional styles aren't, so we have to be careful. This is a big problem for Westerners especially, since they are enthusiatic about pointing out the differences that they feel are distinguishing factors between what they do and what others do. That can be done, of course, but it has to be done according npov policy, and (from a traditional martial standpoint) what Moy would call "Sense of Propriety." The old Chinese martial arts schools worked out a system of behaviour based on the Confucian family model many centuries ago to eliminate overt competition between them. So it can be implied, by the reasoning of that system, that martial styles of T'ai Chi are overtly competitive by saying Taoist society style isn't at all. Again, the right qualifiers (such as the most recent edits I've made to the article) can clear that up without sacrificing info about the school in question.  
Another person who made similar statements, only in reverse, was Bruce Lee. He didn't think that traditional styles were competitive enough! This is from our JKD article:
"Bruce Lee's comments and methods were seen as controversial by many in his time, and still are by many today. Many teachers from traditional schools disagree with his opinions on these issues, especially seeing what Lee described as their lack of strategic flexibility due to "rote" teaching methods to be a misunderstanding on Lee's part. Most, if not all, traditional martial arts teachers say "fluid" strategy is a feature of martial training that is indeed addressed in the curricula of most traditional styles at advanced levels, when the students are ready. The schools Lee criticized tend to see their initial conservatism as a safety feature; a legacy of practical experience passed down from generation to generation, said to ensure that their students are thoroughly prepared for advanced martial training, skipping nothing and developing intangibles such as good character, patience and discipline. The hierarchy of the traditional schools is said by this reasoning to provide a level playing field for all students by instilling respect and care for one's seniors, peers and juniors, so that everyone, not just the physically gifted, has an opportunity to benefit from the training provided in a martial art school."
I mention it because it is a good description of why competition in traditional Chinese schools was discouraged. --Fire Star 05:06, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This is an advert for a commercial organisation
(Added by 87.114.3.172, revision as of 05:58, 27 May 2006)
------
This is no more of a "commercial organization" than the Boy Scouts of America or the YWCA. It is a non-profit. Rasp 17:47, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Note

message: Please go to the official Taoist Tai Chi website for correct information.
This article is misleading and has the wrong tone.
All instructors teach on a voluntory basis. There are a few people who are paid by the society but they are not paid to instruct.```` —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.48.49.146 (talk) 03:55, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Information from an "official" website is not necessarily correct. It should be verified by an independent source. Podmonger (talk) 20:13, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misleading information 

message: :It is becoming rather annoying, this repeatedly removing the list of tai chi moves by User:VanTucky. You repeatedly remove this list from this article and mention in the commentary box a "forms list page", however, without linking to such a page. So it is guessing what page you mean. I have pointed that out to you before. In the commentary box, you justify your actions by referring to "other internal martial art articles".
:I have been looking for a list and I have looked at other articles. Maybe it is this list: List of Tai Chi Chuan forms?. I could not find another. There it says, near the bottom, "Taoist Tai Chi Society form". This appears to be a link to the article Taoist Tai Chi. The one you're cutting the moves from. So you remove information from an article with the comment that it is to be found in that very same article. What nonsense is this? Did you even follow up and check the consequences of your wiping actions?
:This article, Taoist Tai Chi, is totally about the form!!! Who developed it, how it is carried out (information you added yourself), and the names of the moves! The names of the moves belong here! All form related information together! The same as in, for example, Wu Chien-ch'uan style long, or 67 movements Combined Tai-Chi Chuan form (also from that List of Tai Chi Chuan forms).
:Apparently a solution was found where the information not directly related to the form, such as all that is related to the instructors and the aims and objectives were placed in another, more appropriate article: Taoist Tai Chi Society. Seems logical and entirely sensible to me. Now you've put this information, not form related, back again. How odd.
:When I read your comments above I do not (yet) get the impression that you are an unreasonable person. From your user page I even get the impression that you are rather intelligent. Therefore, it surprises me that you keep repeating the same action of effectively destroying information. I ask you to look into this again and not hit the revert button. I have moved more not form related, but Society related information to that appropriate page. 
:JohJak2 12:08, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Forms vs information 

message: Since there doesn't seem to be a userbox for Taoist Tai Chi, I have created one. To add a userbox to your user page just add this code:

to your user page to display this userbox:
Ahunt 04:38, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Userbox

message: This article was tagged for deletion today by an administrator User:Bradeos Graphon. The tag indicated that the lack of third party refs meant the article's notability was in doubt. I have since added some third party references, a reflist and removed the tags on it. The article could certainly use more references added. - Ahunt (talk) 18:03, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Tagged for Deletion

message: The recently added references surely could use some scrutiny. This one: "Scrivener, Leslie. "Marshalling praise for art of Tai Chi", The Toronto Star, Sep 09, 2007" mentions in the article one David Draper. This person mentions the number of TTCS-locations in The Netherlands. He is quoted saying that when he left The Netherlands there were 40 locations. A simple verification (with www.archive.org), using the website of the Netherlands branch over the past years, gives the following numbers: in the fall (around September) 2001:25, 2002:29, 2003:25, 2004:24, 2005:26, 2006:27, and February 2008:31. Clearly nowhere near 40. Through another source I found the other number where this man was quoted was not correct either (i.e. more than one). This person may be trying to boast his own efforts, however, it puts the article in doubt. --VanBurenen (talk) 23:02, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As in the Moy Lin-shin article that seems to be listed as just a "general" ref and not a paragraph citation, so if it is of doubtful accuracy or value it can be removed! - Ahunt (talk) 02:11, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The Taoist Tai Chi that can be put into words is not really Taoist Tai Chi.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.180.211.114 (talk) 08:46, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

text: When I learned the set in the early 1980s "White Snake Turns and Puts out Tongue" was taught as being the same as "Turn and Chop with fist", although it has a different name. I have been told that originally the move was different, but Master Moy simplified it at some point. The ref cited Panter, John & Rick Davis: The Art of Taoist Tai Chi - Cultivating Mind and Body, Second Edition 1992, pages 19 and subsequent. Taoist Tai Chi Society of Canada, 1992.  which I have a copy of, also continues this tradition. Since we need a new ref to change this and all the refs seem to use the "traditional" name, perhaps it would be better to add a small note somewhere instead? Alternatively, because this is not a training manual and therefore people aren't using this article to learn Tai Chi, then perhaps it is fine as it is. - Ahunt (talk) 13:06, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re references 

message: I reverted the wholesale removal of these sections, as the tone of the content was not advisory or how-to in nature, and these principles and exercises are what makes Taoist Tai Chi unique when compared to other tai chi schools. VanTucky Vote in my weird poll! 01:45, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that this section is needed as it does explain how this school differs from others schools. The main thing is that it does not constitute a "how to" manual, as you couldn't take it and actually do tai chi from the descriptions given. It looked like the removals were the first step to removing almost all the content here. - Ahunt (talk) 10:55, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Form principles and foundation exercises 

message: The Taoist Tai Chi Society is run mostly by  member volunteers.  This includes instructors who are not paid to instruct.  As any volunteer not for profit organziation there are some paid employees.  These people are paid very modest salaries.   They work long hours and give tremendous overtime.  If someone is teaching a class and an employee ....this happens rarely...but they are not paid during the hours they are instructing.  One can be an administrative assistant, go home and have dinner and then on one's own time- instruct as a volunteer. AS already stated most employees of the organization are paid little.  If they left their jobs and went to the private sector they would earn much more. This is a not for profit organization.  There are no huge salaries.  I would ask the person who stated this where he or she is getting their information from.  I do not understand the sources and know the information provided to be false. This organization has nothing to hide and their finacial statements do not support what has been said here. Myeyesaresore (talk) 03:40, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There is nothing about this subject presently in the article, perhaps you are thinking about the article Taoist Tai Chi Society. What are you proposing here for this article? - Ahunt (talk) 11:12, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  speak or forever hold tongue 

message: Looks very much like TTCS form:
dr Qi Jiang Tao's (short bio here: ) Taijiquan 47 form:
*http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7a-89AoOilM (dr Qi Jiang Tao's Taijiquan 47 form)
*http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5Xchg06o4M (dr Chi Chiang Tao practising 47 form in the garden)
*http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BoOKKSgEUtY
*http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5U0mLYhmBxg (dr Chi Chiang Tao practising Taiji jian (looks like TTCS sword form)
--VanBurenen (talk) 20:46, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Look alike 

message: The present article is about the tai chi style. The chapter Taoist_Tai_Chi is all about the Taoist Tai Chi Society. It should be moved there. Also the second paragraph in the introduction starting with "Taoist Tai Chi Awareness Days" should be moved there since it deals with corporate activities. --VanBuren (talk) 18:56, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps the two articles should be merged. Acwilson9 (talk) 15:17, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Text belongs in other article 

message: From which of the five major tai chi styles did Moy develop the Taoist Tai Chi form?  (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tai_chi#Styles .) It would be helpful for this article to address this; I myself cannot because I do not know. Acwilson9 (talk) 15:22, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  From which major tai chi styles was the "Taoist" form developed?