Martial Development

Writers such as Paul Craig Roberts need to redefine success, IMO. When the people who are willing to listen are able to listen, then you have accomplished everything you can as a messenger. You will never achieve universal recognition and acceptance. This kind of message will never appear on the front page of the newspaper--that space is reserved for the self-serving story that "nobody could have seen this coming". There is no point in debating with wolves on the virtue of eating sheep. Or with the sheep for that matter! Someone recommended the documentary Collapse a few weeks ago, on this forum. I finally got it from Netflix today--it was quite cogent, if short on solutions.

Belief is a form of force that strengthens its subject. It exists and it affects everyone. Whether it is measurable, depends, in part, on whether you have constructed a special viewing device, e.g. fMRI (c.f. poliovirus or chi).

A good martial artist is attacking the body, the energy, and the spirit all at once. Not even world-class, just good. The only question is whether they fully realize the significance of the act, and choose to frame it in those particular terms. I think that if you knew how to execute "isolated" chi attacks, then you would already know how to counter them as well. Even George Dillman says counters exist. I'm sure don't mean to be citing him (or people like him) as evidence to bolster an argument, only to ignore him when that is more convenient. On the topic of clear definitions, "chi" "exists" because it is ontologically necessary. Polio virus is invisible except with the help of a special viewing device (and manifestations of chi are equally so). For this and a dozen other reasons, choosing to "believe" in one but not the other is anything but objective. Respectfully, I believe this is all pretty much accepted by the audience that constitutes this particular forum. So I don't feel a need to elaborate, but am free to compose a...sloppy comeback.

This is incredibly sloppy reasoning. Not everyone is susceptible to polio or three-card monte either.

Tai-Chi is not Tai Chi Chuan. Even Wikipedia makes that distinction. When we summarize Tai Chi Chuan by stating that it is a "martial art" we are asserting that the Tai Chi qualification is not significant. That it is just a meaningless marketing message, like sun-dried tomatoes or applewood smoked bacon.

One of my teachers played a practical joke on a salesman who sold TENS units. He picked up the demo unit, cranked it up to max and put it on, to no effect at all. "This is a broken piece of junk," he said. When the salesman tried it afterwards, of course it worked perfectly.

I think that is great advice. That, and to "change the channel" depending on whom is approaching you, and whether you want them to get closer or back off. It may be in one's best interest to look, um, difficult. But crossing the line into apparent insanity--while in a public place--is not the best way to avoid attention!

IME people are far less bold about ridiculing a group of people, than a solitary individual. Also, the people who visit the park in the early morning, are less inclined to talking trash than visitors at other times of the day.

I knew a fellow who had some of these problems. He actually developed a burning red stripe on his head (accidentally), kinda like The Last Airbender. A western MD ran some tests and found "no cause" for the condition, and was unable to propose a solution. In order to get rid of it, this guy finally had to give up coffee, soda, chocolate, tea (including "healthy green tea"), spicy foods, and fried foods. And avoid excess meat and salt. And take some expensive ayurvedic herbal prescriptions. Sounds like a real headache, no pun intended.

Just published: Terence McKenna for Dummies

A Scanner Darkly, 2006, is another love-it-or-hate-it film on perception versus reality.

Do you think the history of tobacco over the past 400 years is relevant? Suppose that pattern were repeated with any of a dozen other psychotropic substances--who would profit and who would lose? Is this reason enough to discourage their use in public, even if a different set of guidelines is used in private?

Is Tao large enough to contain its own opposite? If so, than is Taoism similarly large...or is it incomplete? The latter, by its own definition, and it is good to keep that in mind. Furthermore, to remember that insofar as Taoism is expressed in written works, it is the product of a time and a place: and not this time or this place. Anyway... When you decide that "the human population" is a problem, either to be ignored or solved (partially) by yourself, you've already taken a position, even before you've decided what your position is, within the larger "obvious" position. What goes without saying here, I suppose, is that being sterilized or killed is much worse than never being born. (And how certain are you of that?) I would argue that recognizing points such as this is itself "Taoist"--i.e. a fruition of a "Taoist" cultivation process--and no worse for the fact that it is not exclusively so. It also seems to be the opposite of formulating a "Taoist party platform". I think it is fair to say that the goal of Taoism is to surpass itself. Asking whether a particular position is Taoist is a bit like asking how many inches are in a pound.

It was the most original and least original movie I have seen in a long time. Twice as good as The Matrix (or Blade Runner) for my money, and ten times better than Star Wars.

The reasons that people give for hitting things that break easily--to learn control and humility, improve form and confidence, etc--are the same reasons I hit things that don't break easily.

Steven Barnes said, and I quote, The first goal of martial arts should be to gain and keep one's sanity. In other words, to exit the fantasy world that one is almost certainly living in now. Insanity and action are a dangerous combination!

Before reading this thread, I had just finished watching the news report about the deaths in that phony sweat lodge last year. It was created by a man who had declared himself a spiritual leader, a man whose primary qualification (AFAIK) was to "champion awareness" in precisely the manner exhibited by this petition. Someone will also argue that his sweat lodge was created "with the best intentions" and defy anyone to prove otherwise. I am saying, that wasn't good enough then, and it isn't now. We have the right and the responsibility to expect more from those who would be our leaders. Comparisons to fist fights and Krav Maga are entirely inappropriate. These notes have been a polite reality check. Yes, polite. If you are living on this planet, don't fool yourself into believing you're above the fray. Keep doing that, and one day you'll end up on the wrong side of a "sweat lodge", another victim of the best possible intentions. Now, as for what should or could have been done with this petition, keeping it... Specific Measurable Achievable Reasonable Timely ...I would like to see each of those headline signatories publish their annual energy consumption, right next to their name, within 60 days. To be followed up with detailed accounts on how that energy is spent, how they personally intend to reduce it, and how others can follow in their footsteps without turning their lives completely upside-down. That could be a first step towards meaningful action, and I see no reason why we should we accept anything less.

We are discussing what is fruitless and what is best, and how to get there from here. There is nothing petty about it. It is extremely important. It is also the easiest part...so if you don't have the heart, the brains, and the stomach for it...better start growing some. If your house is on fire and your kids are inside, are you going to run away, in order to avoid "fighting" with the blaze? Are you going to start a petition to condemn the excessive heat, calling it "a positive first step towards an agreeable solution to our temperature problems"? I sure hope not! Well, the world is on fire and we are all inside. Word to the noodle!

Nobody in Washington is against energy independence. Just ask them. They are all for it, just like they are all for the ideas of freedom, justice, and equality. Talk is cheap. http://tinyurl.com/24m25zv In fact, the only thing cheaper than talk, is an online petition for a nonbinding resolution to endorse a general commitment to sustainability. Now, having established that what they are trying to do with this petition is already long since done, we can talk about the personal sacrifices they've made to do it yet again. This online petition represents maybe a half-day's work by a copywriter, plus a full day's work by a web developer. Total cost approximately one thousand US dollars, divided by 46 headline signatories, equals around twenty dollars each. THAT is the extent of their sacrifice--if you completely discount the marketing value associated with attaching themselves to the project. Twenty dollars. Fuck them and the high horse they rode in on. There are some well-heeled people on that list, in case you didn't notice, and you think this project is their combined and fully financed genius? There are two reasons that we haven't already achieved sustainability. First, because we haven't reached a consensus on what concrete steps must be taken, steps which we all know will cost real jobs and cause real pain in order to be effective. This is an area where we need honest proposals and real leadership, not platitudes. Second, because the people who are profiting most from the status quo do not respond to petitions.

Bullshit. They have taken no stand. Nobody is against what they are petitioning for, so the petition is without substance. They are literally asking other people to make the sacrifices, commit the resources, and unleash the genius--all tasks they are unwilling to perform themselves, with this very document, because confronting the dirty political realities of our energy situation here would place their images and reputations at risk. It is a disgraceful calculation. We may as well circulate a petition for strawberry ice cream. Which I am strongly in favor of, lest you assume I am consumed by negativity.

Sorry. I resent the fact that Deepak Chopra, Jack Canfield, Debbie Ford, Michael Bernard Beckwith, Barbara Marx Hubbard, and Jean Houston have declared themselves our leaders, in order to circulate a toothless memorandum, and ask us to join their downline for their greater good. How is a petition that proposes no specific steps, and asks its signatories to accept no personal responsibility, going to turn things around? Haven't we already tried "declaring our commitment" while waiting for someone else to handle all the details? Isn't that how we got where we are today?

This is the right forum, and I appreciate it when people share their personal experience. Unless it's wrong, just because it wasn't mentioned in your translated copy of the Tao Te Ching??? Don't worry, another expert thread on the topic of secular humanist pseudoscientific psychobabble will come up shortly.

Consider that the people who succeed with visualization (to the extent they succeed) may not be amenable to mindfulness, and vice-versa. You have to work with what you have, and what one person considers a trivial accomplishment is a major breakthrough to another.

Some of the questions in this thread are answered directly in his book, Born a Healer, FYI.