View Single Post
Old 07-21-2006, 07:03 AM   #144
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: What is the One Point?

I didn't say my thought very clearly, so let me try it again.

There is no such thing as Ki/Qi. Regardless of that, there are indeed these skills/body-abilities, so we can still talk about them, whether we're using western terms like "ground path", fascia, etc., or to clarify that we're talking about the skills referred to traditionally, we can sparingly use the terms ki, qi, jin, kokyu, etc.

So we can knowledgeably and rightfully talk about the ki/kokyu skills, because they can be shown to exist (IF someone knows how to do them), but all the other "things that are Ki", like the "Ki of Heaven", etc., from the old beliefs won't fly as "valid descriptions of Ki".... because they don't exist in reality. Although it would be quite valid as a discussion if someone wants to show what the "Ki of Heaven" really referred to (I think I can show this, incidentally, except it would be impossible to do it meaningfully in print, so I won't even try).

By describing Kokyu, Ki breathing techniques, etc., we're actually explaining (or attempting to explain) how some body mechanics work using western-science terms (note that I carefully did not say we're using western science; no science has been done on these things). I'm very careful to say or assert nothing that can't be demonstrated and replicated.

George's comment, as I understood it, was that other assertions about Ki in different ways were valid descriptions of Ki, but to say that, he has to give some credence to the whole Ki paradigm. Except Ki doesn't exist and at least one of his comments about "ki" and "intention" is actually somewhat off the idea of how "intent" is actually used in relation to kokyu/force.

I.e., we can't say "Ki doesn't really exist" and then at the same time slip in other examples of Ki and claim they're valid without clarifying whether they ARE valid or whether they ONCE WERE considered valid. If someone thinks a Ki-paradigm term is valid, they should explain why it is in western terminology. Heck, just because it turned out that Ki doesn't exist as the "Grand Explainer of Unknown Forces" doesn't mean that the things it was used to explain don't exist. Could make for some interesting conversation.

Regards along with my 2 cents,

Mike Sigman
  Reply With Quote