Craig Hocker wrote:
actually, I prefer not to think.
Cogito, ergo sum.
besides, the physical test is not a direct test of Ki or oneness of mind and body, it is a test of the physical side effects of having oneness of mind and body. The measurement done properly is just as valid as many measurements made in modern physics that indirectly measure some property of a thing.
a couple of examples (snip example of neutrino and MRI)
Hmmmmm. Craig, I don't think those are good examples, particularly if you're implying that the complexity of physical and mathematical inferences in neutrino detection, etc., is paralleled by the subjective criteria of a "ki test". Without even approaching or rebutting that inference, we could rig some simple tests of static physics and vector analysis that would fairly clearly point to simple physics and kinesiology as causative agents rather than unquantifiable forces. Let's use Occam's Razor rather than assume an unwarranted complexity.
Of course, I believe in live and let live and I have no problem with your convictions at all. However, I think I can teach most people fairly rapidly how to do the various Ki tests (naturally, "expertise" will take a little longer, but nothing exorbitant) without using the same visualizations or approach as a "universal Ki" ... i.e., I think these things are in the physical realm and are actually "skills" that can be replicated without necessarily resorting to the particular visualizations you favor. Granted, they are somewhat unusual skills and skills not normally encountered in western kinesiology, but I feel fairly safe in my position. In fact, to be quite candid, these things are also described as "skills" by many Chinese... i.e., my position isn't really very unusual. But you have your position on it and I have mine... and I'd be happy to help rig physical tests to show that we needn't resort to the frontiers of modern science or to unquantifiable energies to explain these things.