wandelaar

I don't know why it should be something else. I have also experimented with it. Not only during waking up but also during falling asleep. When I opened my eyes and then closed them again I would see an after-image, and if I concentrated on that after-image it would evolve into all kinds of things like faces, figures, fantastic landscapes, etc. But it only worked when and as long as I was in the twilight between waking and sleeping.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypnopompic

@ greatsaiyaman You're still claiming that anything is possible, although it may take hard work to get it done. But that simply isn't true and it cannot be true. I posted the reasons why this is so way back on the first page of this topic:

Is there a thread somewhere on The Dao Bums where Bums who are only just beginning to study the classical Chinese language can discuss their problems and achievements?

Thanks for the comments. Unhappily they are in line with my suspicion that chi as experienced by Taoist and Martial Arts practitioner's doesn't point to something real. I did karate, yoga, meditation, and qi gong but I didn't experience chi. The experience of chi isn't a necessary result of the mentioned practices. Surely one can learn to feel all kinds of things, and suggestion, doctrinal studies, and visualisation will help to experience chi. But as long as objective tests and rational analysis are banned the experience of chi may be nothing more than a (sub)culturally induced experience, and not the alternative form of observation that it is claimed to be. I believe the many people who claim to have experienced chi, but I am not convinced of the correctness of their interpretation of those experiences. And I wouldn't even be convinced of the correctness of their interpretation if I had those experiences myself. Subjective experiences are to be taken with a grain of salt.

That's right, so one would do well to tolerate the existence of piss and shit. But Chuang tzu didn't promote to piss and shit in all places.

There has to be a paradigm in which chi (in its different forms) makes at least some sense, for otherwise the concept would have been given up long ago. But the question remains how much sense it makes. One of the best books about it - I am told - is this one: https://www.amazon.com/Study-Qi-Classical-Texts/dp/1872468284 I already bought the book, and we will see how I think about chi when I have read it.

Taking winning (large amounts of) money as an example might be problematic, but I certainly agree with your idea that theories need to be tested to evaluate their value. And that even applies to spiritual theories. Otherwise it's just empty speculation.

This is so beautiful, it brings tears to my eyes...

@ liminal_luke Why not learn to ignore those topics that are about politics? I have a well filled Ignore List myself, and I seldom visit the topics that revolve around political controversy. Criticising the presence of political discussions here will not help, we already did that. It is exactly the enervating game of criticism and counter criticism that is sucking people into the political mud fights. What could be done about it as to the presentation of the forum has already been done. Just concentrate on the Taoist and spiritual topics.

@ manitou The problem with quantum mechanics and relativity physics is that our ordinary experience doesn't concern elementary particles or objects moving at relativistic velocities. That makes our language and pictures of the world that are formed on the basis of our day to day experiences, inadequate for describing the phenomena of quantum mechanics and relativity physics. Happily we can still deal with quantum and relativistic phenomena by using mathematical models because mathematics is more encompassing than our common language and naive pictorial representations.

@ Rocky Lionmouth Thanks for your large post. They are not regarded as ridiculous, but as obsolete. That's a big difference. And as regards the aether there are even scientist who still work with the concept (although a small minority). The great thing about science is that it continually improves upon older theories, and that isn't a sign of weakness but of strength. I have already read a lot about chi, but I still have some more books to go. However I would be very much surprised when the concept of chi would turn out to be of greater explanatory power than our own rather vague concepts of vitality and energy (when we take them in the obscure New Age sense). Further - as an einzelgänger I am in the happy circumstance of being able to almost completely ignore the silly annual Xmas business.

If ViYY keeps up this sense of humour I might even consider releasing him from my Ignore List. haha.

Could you explain?

Why was that?

Let us know what you find...

I'm not exactly clear about it myself yet, but there is also a psychological component to it. Systematically solving problems leaves out something essential. But I first have some books to read about attention and flow that seem relevant before commenting any further.

Plato's Allegory of the Cave is a double edged sword. Just as it can be used to induce doubt about the reality of the world of sensory experience, it can also be used to induce doubt about the reality of the experiences of those who claim superior (super-sensory or even super-rational) knowledge. There could be a nested sequence of caves within caves, within caves, etc. The supposition that we live in a simulation just adds silly speculations to the world we know. Every age comes with it's own speculations and ours typically comes up with the idea that it is all running on a computer. Much better is to just call the foundation of our world Tao, and leave it at that.

It depends on the person and his (prior) world view how much proof one needs to accept something like chi projection as a fact.

That's more like how a real experiment should look like. But there are still some concerns such as did the cow see the teacher, did the teacher make strange moves that upset the cow, considerations of statistical likelihood, etc.

And anti-science guys ask a lot of questions that prove that they don't want to put in the necessary effort to understand the problems they are talking about. You could start separate topics about the scientific problems you encounter, and I and others who know about it will then try to answer your questions there. But being lazy and joining in the postmodernist anti-science choir will not do, you will have to put in effort to understand the science behind your questions.

That's part of what we have to do (study what we need to know and acquire the necessary skills), but then after that the Taoist way of handling things would be wu wei. Apart from Taoism as a philosophy reaching wu wei will be my main focus. I'm not after miracles or supernatural capabilities. Going through life in a creative, graceful and effortless manner without unnecessary worries will be enough.

Interesting video. What we see there is mass suggestion and unconscious role playing. Look how he first points to those who are supposed to fall. Then the people further away are unsure whether or not they belong to the group that is supposed to fall, and the effect is much less. Same thing can be done with hypnosis. That's why I am sceptical about the supposed effects of chi projection. These kind of shows are for consumption by uncritical believers, because as experimental demonstrations they are deeply flawed.

Could you explain what you mean by that?

Nevertheless - the dude did talk...