21 posts / 0 new
Last post
Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture
Awesome Martial Journeys Episode

This podcast is AWESOME! Love it! Love it! Love it! Great information delivered in a hugely entertaining way! Everyone needs to listen to this. Some great myth-busting! Martial arts need more of this!:

http://www.martialjourneysofmadison.com/episode-13-whats-the-deal-with-energy/

I enjoy this podcast a lot and this episode is superb!

All the best,

Iain

PS I had a good giggle when punches were “explained” through the actions of the Taekwondo fairies!

Tau
Tau's picture

Microscopic Taekwondo fairies :-)

Anf
Anf's picture

In defence of 'chi', it is a very convenient label. I see nothing wrong with people believing in it at whatever level suits them.

Consider this. One of my non-martial artist friends once came to watch a grading. At the end of the grading, the last step was a board breaking test. My friend asked afterwards why I had approached the board holders, bowed, dropped into a fighting stance then just did nothing for a few seconds. I was just stood there, focusing on the target, visualising a line of fire that went right through the target to a point several inches behind it, held that new target in my mind, visualised the insignificance of the board that was being held in the way, then focused all my energy into the ball of my foot before letting it go off like a rocket.

Of course none of that is magic (or all of it is, science is just the study of the mechanics of magic :) All that happened in reality is some bloke took a moment to ensure his foot would go through a board at the weakest point in said board, and strongest alignment foot parts. It was just physics. But in explaining how to do that to someone who is really not that interested in the real answer to the question they asked, it's easier to just say something like, I channelled my chi :)

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Tau wrote:
Microscopic Taekwondo fairies :-)

I know! I loved that bit too :-)

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Anf wrote:
I see nothing wrong with people believing in it at whatever level suits them.

I have a major issue with it. If people are not very careful, using the term “chi” propagates nonsense, can be used to intentionally and unintentionally mislead, and it can be massively damaging to both the practise and perception of the martial arts in general.

Anf wrote:
All that happened in reality is some bloke took a moment to ensure his foot would go through a board at the weakest point in said board, and strongest alignment foot parts. It was just physics.

It was physics, so we should call in physics and explain it as physics. That’s the truth. No mystical force called “chi” was used, so we should not imply it was by using the terminology associated with it.

Anf wrote:
But in explaining how to do that to someone who is really not that interested in the real answer to the question they asked, it's easier to just say something like, I channelled my chi :)

If they are not interested in a real answer, we don’t help the situation by giving them a false one.

I’m OK with using “chi” as a joke if others are in on the joke though. I’ve a few martial tricks like that where it can leave the recipient a little confused as to what happened, and I’m OK with smiling and saying it was my “chi”.

When a stage magician does a trick, they leave us baffled and amazed, but they don’t claim they really have magic powers. If they did, then that’s dishonest. The example of James Hydrick comes to mind. He claimed he could move objects using chi and his mind, and he gave some impressive demonstrations of this … and then failed on national TV when James Randi (stage magician) knew how the trick was done (https://youtu.be/uq5MtA33OHk?t=237). He would also get his students to lie down on the floor and try to move the punch bags with their minds using methods he had taught them. They were amazed when the bags swung … later revealed to the effect of the midday sun heating the tin roof and it expanding. As the roof moved, the bags hanging from it moved a little too. They never did try it at night :-)

So, I’m OK with a martial trick – explained and understood as a trick to all – done purely for entertainment claiming “chi” in the same way a stage magician claims “magic”. However, any inference that chi is truly in play is both dishonest and harmful to the martial arts.

As an aside, I was once contacted by a TV company wanting to make a show on “martial miracles”. They had found writing of mine on this very forum on things like “iron shirt” and allegedly making bells ring with kiai etc and they wanted to know if I’d like to contribute. I said that I would providing the show’s aim was to debunk and that I was permitted to explain that such claims are nonsense. They said it sounded like I was not right for the show :-)

All the best,

Iain

Anf
Anf's picture
Iain Abernethy wrote:

Anf wrote:
I see nothing wrong with people believing in it at whatever level suits them.

I have a major issue with it. If people are not very careful, using the term “chi” propagates nonsense, can be used to intentionally and unintentionally mislead, and it can be massively damaging to both the practise and perception of the martial arts in general.

But why should we care?

The facts are readily available. If a person has a genuine interest, it won't take them long to find out. If they don't have a genuine interest then it really doesn't matter.

A wise person (a rather geeky colleague with no interest in martial arts) that martial artists must be thick skinned, because they dress in pyjamas, then play at being samurai warriors in the local community hall. This amused me greatly. He is right. That's exactly what we do. Although perhaps not exactly. Depending on style it may not be technically samurai we're playing at, at the pyjamas might be more of a dressing gown or maybe skin tight lycra, again depending on style, but in essence he is right.

So if the genuinely interested will seek the answers, and the disinterested won't believe the answers they get anyway, what harm does it do to give a tongue in cheek answer to the odd daft question?

PASmith
PASmith's picture

But why should we care?

Personally I think there's enough nonsense in the world without my adding to it. Nonsense is something we should seek to minimise because the truth matters (to me at least).

I have no problem with mentioning chi as a culturally contextual and pre-scientific term for certain things or ideas in martial arts but will always qualify with a better and more scientific explanation.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

And wrote:
But why should we care?

I think the damage it does is there to be seen. Some sections of the martial arts have a big problem with pseudoscience. That is not only damaging to the people taken in by it, but when that is presented as being representative of the martial arts in general, it is also damaging to public’s perception of the martial arts. We should care so that, one day, martial arts will be a “woo” free zone. This video is well worth a watch around these issues.

 

And wrote:
So if the genuinely interested will seek the answers, and the disinterested won't believe the answers they get anyway, what harm does it do to give a tongue in cheek answer to the odd daft question?

As per my previous post, a joke when everyone in on the joke is OK. An open deception (like a magic trick) done for entertainment or amusement, when everyone is aware that’s the case, is totally fine too. Anything that contributes to confusion and delusion is harmful though and I feel it should be avoided.

All the best,

Iain

Anf
Anf's picture

I concede that chi, in some contexts, is silly. But that's because it is misrepresented. The concept itself is not so ridiculous. In the west, and to some extent in the more commercial corners of the east, chi has become mystical. Like the 'taekwondo fairies'. But as I'm sure everyone who frequents this forum knows, issues often arise from the fact that there are few literal word for word translations and we need context to make a best approximation.

From what I can gather, 'chi' is the energy that comes from air or breath. Last time I did anything without breathing I found it extremely difficult. Breathing makes things much easier. So if chi is the energy that comes from air and breath, it is very real, tangible and perfectly fitting with our understanding of modern science.

Where it all falls apart is when folks misrepresent 'chi'. Instead of being a convenient one syllable label for energy cultivated through correct breathing, it becomes some mystical Eastern magic exclusive to elderly men with long beards who live alone on a mountain. Of course its ridiculous when taken out of context and misrepresented. But then so are lots of things in martial arts. Standing in a deep horse stance while repeatedly firing straight punches at thin air for example. It's it great physical exercise. It develops the muscles in the legs, promotes good posture, is sufficiently uncomfortable to get comfortable with being uncomfortable etc. Misrepresented or taken out of context it is someone standing in a silly pose doing something pointless and wasting lots of energy. People outside of the martial arts that see it will (and often do) find it funny.

There are lots of things within that martial arts that if misunderstood or misrepresented in any way seem ridiculous. So which ones do we need to address? Which ones do we refuse to talk about for fear of propagating ridicule?

The thing is with 'chi', if someone wants to believe it's Eastern hocus pocus, they'll believe that no matter what. If they are open minded enough to truly question their own beliefs and ideas, then they'll form their own conclusions through study and won't take the first answer they get from anyone.

Heath White
Heath White's picture

A little philosophical context on "chi" ...

The earliest use of "chi" in Confucius' _Analects_ allows it to mean "breath."  That is precisely what the earliest Greek use of "pneuma" means, which later comes to mean "spirit."  So I think there is a common human tendency to explain human life in terms of the breath, which leaves when you die, and later to expand this concept to other breathing things, other forms of life, other more general powers of nature. 

A good translation of "chi" would be "spirit" and this would preserve a lot of English ambiguity: we talk of high-spiritedness, martial spirit, the spirit of a dojo, and we are being metaphorical.  But some people literally believe that a mystical life-force, their spirit, explains something about their performance, or that a similar spirit pervades nature like the Force.  And these are myths or anyway not useful theories for martial artists to be working with.

So if we are using "chi" as a metaphor, sure no problem.  But it is frequently (mostly) used non-metaphorically as part of a theory, for a mystical life-force which explains outcomes in martial arts.  Used this way, the explanations compete with explanations based on biomechanics and physics.  And I agree with Iain that we do better to focus on the physical and biomechanical explanations and forgo the chi-based ones.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Anf wrote:
There are lots of things within that martial arts that if misunderstood or misrepresented in any way seem ridiculous. So which ones do we need to address? Which ones do we refuse to talk about for fear of propagating ridicule?

We address all of them. We can talk about all of them … BUT we should not propagate, accept or support nonsense as part of those discussions.

Like it or not, “chi” as a term has loads of baggage. If we mean “breath” then we should say “breath”. To do otherwise opens the door for confusion and, in some cases, outright deception.

If someone claims “chi” as a mystical force (as many do) then I think it is beholden on the martial arts community to reject such claims without the evidence to support them. Personal belief and anecdote are not evidence.

Everyone is entitled to their personal option, but when they present that option as objective fact, they are wanting others to accept their option. It’s therefore no longer a “personal” option; it’s public. It is right that such public assertions are challenged. One would then hope that most will then move toward the view that has evidence to support it.

People should not use “chi” as a metaphor for breath, biomechanics, intent, etc. If we mean breath, say “breath”. If we mean biomechanics, then say “biomechanics”. If we mean mental intention, then say “mental intention”. If someone says “chi” to mean something else that has no scientific basis, then it should be challenged. To date, such challenging has shown “chi” has no objective basis in reality and hence the logical potion is to reject it.  

No one living in England today would describe sudden shooting pains as “elf shot”; not even as a metaphor.  We call it “cramp” and we know they are trigged by dehydration, overwork, shortages of potassium, calcium or magnesium, etc. If we did call it “elf shot” – as the Anglo-Saxons did – then it infers a belief in invisible beings firing invisible arrows. Rejecting the term “elf shot” is not the same as rejecting cramps. We are labelling those sharp muscle pains in a much more useful way when we avoid antiquated terminology. It’s the same with “chi” in my view. It is an outdated term, based on a false worldview, that obscures and confuses; as such it should be rejected and replaced with objective terminology that points to the thigns really at work.  

All the best,

Iain

PASmith
PASmith's picture

My toes got elf shot at the seminar on Sunday! :)

Anf
Anf's picture

I've never heard the term elf shot before reading it here. I'm definitely incorporating that.

Tau
Tau's picture

The Iain Abernethy forum; bringing back Anglo Saxon words since 2019!

Today my neck has been resoundedly elf shot!

Wastelander
Wastelander's picture

I actually made a video about chi/energy techniques a few years ago:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90cFP_DRI4Y

In case it wasn't obvious, it was an April Fools joke--and I tricked quite a few people with it. The sad part is that I really didn't make up any of the things I included in the video--I just embellished them a little. Continuing to use chi/ki/qi/energy in lieu of proper, modern terminology is a recipe for problems, and helps perpetuate fraud, in my opinion. Call things what they are, not what people called them before they understood them.

Anf
Anf's picture

Wastelander wrote:
In case it wasn't obvious, it was an April Fools joke--and I tricked quite a few people with it. The sad part is that I really didn't make up any of the things I included in the video--I just embellished them a little. Continuing to use chi/ki/qi/energy in lieu of proper, modern terminology is a recipe for problems, and helps perpetuate fraud, in my opinion. Call things what they are, not what people called them before they understood them.

Your video is still on YouTube. So is it OK to perpetuate the concept of chi as long as we only publish it to the world on 1st April?

Anf
Anf's picture

All jokes aside, something reminded me today of the time I spent practicing tai chi with a class of mostly elderly people.

In that class, there was a lot of talk about, and belief in, chi in the magical sense.

Of course I knew the tingling in the fingertips was a trick of the nervous system as a consequence of breathing and moving a certain way. But many in the class believed they were feeling magic.

These are people that can no longer run or jump or in some cases even walk very well. These are people whose kids are now grown up and developing age related ailments and aches and pains of their own. These are people who can only look forward to further physical deterioration and loss, ultimately death.

If these people get some happiness from a belief that they are channelling some kind of magic to their fingertips, and it makes them feel good, and it puts a smile on their faces for a short time, who am I or anyone else to rain on their bonfire and tell them it's just that they've messed with their blood chemistry?

PASmith
PASmith's picture

I prefer Carl Sagan's take in things...

“Better the hard truth, I say, than the comforting fantasy.”

Even old people, I think, value the truth and would value someone being honest and open with them. Sugar coating the truth is something you do with children because they need to be mature enough before knowing everything. I don't think you need it with adults. Arguably their Tai chi would mean just as much to them, and be just as useful and valuable without the "magic" overlay.

If we go the route of not questioning things just because it makes someone happy then we open the door to all sorts of nonsense. Psychics, tarot cards, horoscopes, etc etc.

In fact Iain's whole approach is founded on questioning and seeking the best answers. Not taking perceived dogma or views as truth.

My own take on things is this...if I see some pensioners doing Tai Chi for health I'm not going to bullrush in and say notions of Chi as a life force are all nonsense. I'm gonna smile and inwardly congratulate them for being active. But I will not perpetuate nonsense myself (as far as I'm able) and if asked directly will be totally honest.

Wastelander
Wastelander's picture

Anf wrote:
Your video is still on YouTube. So is it OK to perpetuate the concept of chi as long as we only publish it to the world on 1st April?

Back to Iain's point about jokes that everyone is "in" on, yes, it is. April Fools Day is a fairly widely accepted "holiday" for perpetuating jokes and pranks, and I think that most people are pretty well on board with the idea that they will be encountering such things on that day. Additionally, the date it was published is included in the video title, and the video, itself, ends with "Happy April Fools Day," so people who watch it can still understand that it was released for that day/purpose. Not to mention the escalating ridiculousness as the video progresses :P.

In no way did I state in the video that these things are true/real, and if asked, I would quickly and happily debunk such beliefs.

Anf wrote:
All jokes aside, something reminded me today of the time I spent practicing tai chi with a class of mostly elderly people. In that class, there was a lot of talk about, and belief in, chi in the magical sense. Of course I knew the tingling in the fingertips was a trick of the nervous system as a consequence of breathing and moving a certain way. But many in the class believed they were feeling magic. These are people that can no longer run or jump or in some cases even walk very well. These are people whose kids are now grown up and developing age related ailments and aches and pains of their own. These are people who can only look forward to further physical deterioration and loss, ultimately death. If these people get some happiness from a belief that they are channelling some kind of magic to their fingertips, and it makes them feel good, and it puts a smile on their faces for a short time, who am I or anyone else to rain on their bonfire and tell them it's just that they've messed with their blood chemistry?

I disagree with you on that, because I think the reality of what they are doing is more impressive, and should be explained to them and lauded, instead of letting them believe it's just magic. As you age, you start to lose control of your body, in various ways, and in some cases, your mind, as well. The fact that such training methods allow you to focus your mind and have an affect on your body, in a physiological sense, is pretty empowering, in my opinion. People like Wim Hof withstanding insanely cold temperatures for seemingly-inhuman amounts of time isn't impressive because it's magic--it's impressive because of the incredible mental focus and bodily control.

Anf
Anf's picture
Wastelander wrote:

Back to Iain's point about jokes that everyone is "in" on, yes, it is. April Fools Day is a fairly widely accepted "holiday" for perpetuating jokes and pranks, and I think that most people are pretty well on board with the idea that they will be encountering such things on that day. Additionally, the date it was published is included in the video title, and the video, itself, ends with "Happy April Fools Day,"

With respect, its not an 'in joke' when it's on the most popular video sharing site in the world. Not many people take note of the date of publication, and not everybody watches videos to the end. I didn't. I watched as far as explanations that crossing toes counters the opponents chi or something. I know it is a joke, because I was forewarned here. Had I stumbled across it I'd have quickly concluded it is hocus pocus and moved on.

This is absolutely no criticism of you or your video. I myself like to poke fun at certain concepts and people from time to time. What interests me is the notion that I'm wrong for not shattering someone else's belief, while it's OK to promote that belief, even in mockery. But I guess that's because I'm not in on the 'in joke'

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Anf wrote:
WNot many people take note of the date of publication, and not everybody watches videos to the end. I didn't. I watched as far as explanations that crossing toes counters the opponent’s chi or something. I know it is a joke, because I was forewarned here.

Much of humour involves misdirection before the punchline. The comedian leads you to anticipate one outcome, and then quickly reveals something unexpected. The psychology of all this is beyond me, but I believe laugher has its origins in a communal noise of relief and celebration to indicate that danger has passed and all is well again i.e. what was though to be a beast in the bushes was just the wind. You therefore can’t reveal the punchline up front, because to do so would lose all the humour.

You also can’t be responsible for listeners and viewers not following through to the end or misinterpreting. What you can and should do, is make sure that you are 100% clear this is a joke at the end (as Noah did). If he had cut off half way through, it could have misled people. He didn’t do that. If people chose to stop watching half way, and hence make faulty conclusions that’s hardly the fault of the creator. That’s the same with anything. If you read half of a book you can’t complain that the “ending” made no sense and critique the author as a result. That's on the reader.

Anf wrote:
What interests me is the notion that I'm wrong for not shattering someone else's belief, while it's OK to promote that belief, even in mockery.

I don’t think that matches what has been said in the thread. Many have said that false beliefs are false (even if comforting) and, because the truth is more valuable than the lie, that all falsehoods should be labelled as such. This prevents both unintentional and intentional deception and the harms that can arise from that for both the individual labouring under the false belief and those it may spread to.

Mockery is mockery. You don’t promote a belief by mocking it. Quite the contrary. By way of example, dictators famously have no sense of humour about themselves because they know it can diminish their standing. Conversely, healthy democracies have lots of satire because challenge and debate are built into the system.  

The things Noah shows in his videos are presented by others as being legit. If a believer in no-touch manipulation / knockouts where to watch that video they would realise he was faking it … and if he fakes it, maybe others are too? In addition, it raises the question of something being so ridiculous as to be ridiculed. It does not promote it, but it uses humour to challenge and from there move toward truth.

Mockery is not the only way to spark discussion and questioning, but it can be a useful part of the mix when done right. There’s no ambiguity by the end of Noah’s video. The majority will get it’s a joke. It’s therefore useful and helpful. For the tiny minority that don’t watch and think it’s legit, then hopefully they will share the video of the “magic man” with others, who will watch to the end. Either way, it will do way more good than harm … and it will make a few people smile too :-)

All the best,

Iain