why is chi kung rubbish

Yeah indeed. It's "something" I'll give it that.
But not really "human knowledge"?
If all knowledge disappeared tomorrow it's not something we'd need to re-discover is it?

 

The work in the videos is similar to stuff I have done in the past.Have you trained with Bruce?

 

Yes I do practice some of the Brice's stuff. But this is not part of it. There are many similarities between chi kung sets from various sources. I really like the fact that within this simple medical set, you have a very powerful martial training embedded as well for good measure.

 

I don't think it's rubbish
srry

 

chi gung gives me access to paranormal abilities and an unkown force that flows through the universe that makes me unnaturally strong, heals wounds in myself and others, and enables me to move objects without touching them whilst riding my pet dragon.

Did I mention I hava a pet dragon?

 

Are you sure it isn't a Wyvern?

 

It'll depend on what shout he is using to summon it.

 

Okay so prove that you actually exist.

What gave you the right to dictate how and when something must be proven? This is not a witch hunt (or is it?). That is just one philosophical standpoint, which is clearly not held by everyone. Where does it stop? Are you just going to insult every Buddhist you meet for their blind belief, or will you spread your personal joy under the guise of the 'we' to Christians, Muslims, Jews, and kids who believe in father Christmas and the tooth fairy?

 

Don't be absurd

If something is a belief system that is one thing, but if you state that something is a phenomena that can (a) be felt and (b) be taught, then out of necessity you have to be able to prove it exists

The fact no-one can is telling

 

I was not being absurd (unless you are referring to my comments about my pet dragon).

If there is a claim that a feeling exists then by definition in order to establish whether this is 'true' or not it has to be tried and experienced. ( as you cannot view a feeling). The issue with feelings is that they are hugely subjective so what works for one person may not work for another, and what you or I may experience may not be the same as someone else.

Without actually trying it you cannot possibly refute that it exists and hope to be taken seriously. On the other hand there are clearly plenty of people who have tried it and it works on some level for them.

I am just trying to make the point that dissing something because it's outside the scope of our own experience is not a valid response

 

Saying "you have to experience it" is only valid when talking about an emotion or an intangible - but even then only to a certain extent

With regards to chi gung (as "energy") you are NOT talking about either - you are talking about a physical skill and manifestation of same. With that there are set parameters that have to be met, and it does not meet them

 

Okay, fair enough.
I have never tried Chi Kung, and yes I find some of the claims made outlandish, however am not willing to simply dismiss them out of hand. What it boils down to for me is meditation and focus, which is present in all martial arts to one degree or another. Chi appears to be a method of focussing internal energy and channelling it positively, in the same way that a boxer may shut out any external noise, slow down his clock and focus all of his weight into a square inch of one fist. For some people boxing may fit, and they 'get it', for others this may not be the case and they need to understand it and deal with it a different way. That person may not understand the science of boxing, but may 'get' chi Kung. We all learn in different ways and with different cues, thus the world is an interesting place.

 

Define "internal energy" first

 

I would use it as a catch all term for any emotion, feeling or energy that exists within your own body and experience as opposed to some mystical 'force' that exists outside that you may or may not think you are connected to. This could be simple mechanics of using muscle groups like a coiled spring, or it could be harnessing and using the flinch response. I don't see it as mystical in any way. The fact that practitioners of Chi Kung do see it as somehow mystical does not bother me, it is just another way of understanding or dealing with essentially the same thing. Then again I could be way off the mark here because I have never tried Chi Kung so I can't comment on how it would affect me or how it would work or not for me.

 

The force it is called and powerful it is. Through all living things flow it does. It's existence proven can be by the way a Master speaks.

 

Got it - I need that frame of reference before commenting further you see!

Essentially we are in accord - I define chi as "bio-tensegrity" (ever since someone used that term I stole it!).

Even amongst chi-gung practitioners there is dispute - my Sifu is a Tai Chi disciple in Chen lineage and defines it as I do, whereas others (like the OP) define it as a tangible yet mystic energy. Chi Gung to me is a way to get "in touch" with your body, which facilitates better "feel" and ergo better mechanics. Adhering to this definition does not invalidate the skill of the practitioner - ascribing it to midichlorians does

Or to put it another way, I cannot prove it isn't a magic force field, but if it is then they are doing it the hard way

 

Thanks Mike, very helpful

 

I like your way of putting it, useful in whatever you train in.

 

I'm not sure why its so difficult to accept that Qi Theory is just another way of explaining why the body is as it is and does what it does.

If I asked everyone to think of a particular object---say a Cowboy Hat--- we would all form a picture in our minds. Noone knows how or why we do it, but there is that picture between our ears. If you talk to a Western MD, or Bio-Physicist, or Bio-Chemist they may have a theory but noone knows exactly how it works. Why are advocates of Chinese Medicine being held to a different standard. Sure there are Chinese who make stupid declarations, but are there no stupid Western Doctors?

I'm just really surprised at how much energy this topic evokes. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

Its because there is a thing as Truth with a capital T, and the modern scientific method is the method by which all this Truth and therefore all modern technology has been developed.

If you argue against this whilst communicating to strangers in other countries using computers networked to each other by signals sent wirelessly through space, you will be judged accordingly.

And No, people with a decent scientific background will all have pretty much the same general udea on what makes a hat a hat, even when its a Tea coasy.