Sloppy Zhang

For a beginner, I suggest you get B.K. Frantzis' "Opening the Energy Gates of Your Body". He teaches from the water method tradition, so his approach is slightly different. Before accumulating energy, his lineage method is to clear out the system of blockages first. That way, when you do start to accumulate energy, you don't burn out the system. And if you have problems feeling areas of your body, this method will get you feeling pretty much just about everywhere. And that's the point- because if you can't feel your body, then you won't be able to tell if you're starting to do something wrong. And that can be pretty dangerous. Other systems advocate building up energy, and using that surge of energy to open/feel parts of your body. But it can get pretty risky if you've got blockages or injuries that could flare up as a result. People practicing under the guidance of a teacher who can monitor them are safer. If you're going to go that route on your own, be advised.

Understandable. Once you've set the top in motion, it's best to just let it spin Quitting while you're ahead means you don't say something to mess up your own argument later down the line. Good move, for some.

Ah, the spin, the spin! You're so entrenched in your dualistic worldview, you have yet to see that all is truly one! Human interactions operate on the same underlying mechanisms. Those who have learned those mechanisms are successful at human interaction. Those who have not are not. Some people learn it "intuitively" through trial and error over the course of their lives. Others do no. Some people don't understand why they are successful, they just "do what comes naturally". Others don't understand why they are failures, they are just "trying to be themselves". If someone who routinely fails makes a study of it, they will learn to do the same things as "naturals". With time, it can become habit, instinct, and "intuition" as the information becomes hardwired and they learn to pick up things on the fly, to roll with the punches, to flow within the moment, and become spontaneous. Spin spin spin. Oh I have many times for many times. That's how I know your statement is broad, and that's what bothered me about it. "all of which is good", you, said... I'm not so sure you want to jump so quickly to "it's all good". Because a lot of it isn't. Duh. Way to point out the obvious. That's how debates work. You bring up points on suggestions for bedroom arts. Okay. Wonderful. I haven't read those books, so I can neither confirm nor deny the quality of your points in regards to that content. So instead I comment on things I can that we have discussed so far- the underlying mechanics of social interaction, and the advertising quality spin campaign that you've been subject to and which you subject others to which involves glorifying the "naturals" who just have "it", and demonizing the "creepy", "disingenuous" people who are trying to learn "it". I'm pretty "natural", but there's nothing mystical in what's going on. It's within every human's understanding and ability to enact. Pickup artists have done a phenomenal job researching what works and why it works. Can some of that information be used for "bad"? For "good"? Yes, of course. It's just information. What you do with it is up to you. Martial artists learn plenty of great ways to break kneecaps. Does that mean that martial artists are inherently psychotic physical abusers? No. In like fashion, pickup artists and pickup techniques are not all the "insincere" "creepy" tactics that I'm sure you'd like them to be. I've been pretty clear on why it is spin- Two categories of action are virtually the same, by reason that they both operate under the same mechanics (the underlying aspects of social interaction). One of them is approved- learning via trial and error on the fly, internalizing it, and not breaking down what you are doing ahead of time or after the fact. One of them is "insincere"- breaking down the process of human interactions, naming phases of certain social interactions, knowing how to change to different states in relationships, and to that end, knowing what works and why.

Quality seduction techniques use the same mechanisms that "genuine moments" have. Except that quality seduction techniques know what's going on and why. Others do not. If you can pick up stuff without knowing what's going on, more power to you. If you can't, then there's no harm in learning the mechanics so you can start having the quality experiences. If you know what you're doing, then you know that seduction techniques are based in reality So, actually, you just proved the theory You might not do things that you may personally characterize as "creepy" (more spin, btw), but that doesn't mean that the mechanics behind the actions (of things you do or don't do) are any difference. Right. And then you followed that up by saying that this way a girl will call you up again because of what you did in the bedroom Better than a vibrator, and cooks too! All the underlying principles are the same. You can use knowledge of human anatomy to learn karate, basketball, or weaving. Some bodies, different training and applications. That's pretty broad, you know....

Their process is the same as well. It's just a matter of whether you are cognizant of it happening or not. For naturals, it has been hardwired into their brains for decades, so it only appears "natural", "spontaneous", "intuitive", or "genuine" to them, because they don't have the awareness to see all of the billions of micro processes that are going on in their brain which are subconsciously picking up on body language, language, inflection, eye movements, surrounding environment, etc. Exactly the same goes for the "naturals". They do it because they enjoy doing it because they know where it will lead them. They just aren't cognizant of it. At least the socially challenged people who learn through structure KNOW that they are doing it. "Naturals" do the same stuff, but put on airs about being "genuine" and blah blah blah. It's bullshit, really. Again, pretty much the same shit, spun different ways. Again, "naturals" have learned to do the same things. They just don't know that they've learned it. People who don't cope well with social situations haven't picked it up subconsciously. So they actually have to go in and break it down. And to some people, especially "naturals", that looks "insincere", because for "naturals", that's not how the "magic", the "intuitiveness", the "sincerity" happens. I consider myself somewhat of a "natural", so at first I was saying the same things as you were saying. But then I read some pickup theory and stuff (mystery method, among others), and saw the value in it. I saw it in what I had done, and what I have seen others do. Again, it's the same stuff wrapped differently. "Naturals" will do the same shit that pickup artists do, but "naturals" will say "just be in the moment and go with what happens", because they have learned, they just don't know it. Pickup artists know not only what works, but WHY it works. So they can both teach it, and adapt it for different contexts, which some naturals won't do. Don't you just love the spin? Again, "naturals" have learned to do this without being aware. Your beautiful experiences had the exact same forces at play that pickup artists' experiences had. Except they knew it, and you do not. So maybe ignorance is bliss?

You realize that quality seduction techniques do exactly this, don't you? Again, seduction techniques don't teach anything that people don't already do. People who are "naturals" with women, people who can intuitively read people/situations/"energies" do this same thing every day, they just don't know they are doing it. Quality seduction techniques identify the underlying mechanisms, names them, and provides a framework that someone who isn't learning them naturally can do them. So basically you think dudes should instead learn to be living, breathing sex toys to get girls off so they keep coming back? Sheesh. At least seduction techniques teach you how to listen and relate to people. Such as...?

I've heard about stuff like this, but never learned it. What are the different eye positions supposed to be? You realize that these are practically the exact same things, but just spun differently, don't you? It's this weird, paradoxical situation, where if you are just doing it without knowledge of it, being "spontaneous", then you're somehow "okay", but if you do the exact same thing, with knowledge of it, you're somehow being "dishonest". That's insane. Exactly. All the more reason to learn how to do it if you can't already do it. No manipulation there.

Girls usually want to "date up", which means they look for the guy with the "highest value". Of course, as many systems of thought tell us, many things are relative. You can increase your own value. Or you can decrease her value. (Or at least the perceptions thereof). Either way, it puts the guy in a higher position than the girl. Which fosters attraction because many girls want to "date up". Of course, group relational power dynamics like this work pretty much everywhere. It sounds bad when you talk about things on an individual, romantic scale, especially when you compare it to society's fairy tales. But start looking at other areas of your life, and you see where this comes in many many many many many times over. The world is a pretty fucked up place. If you want to get stuff, it helps to know the fucked up rules that other people are playing by. You can choose to follow them or not. But no denying that they are there and that, well, they work.

Pi. Approximate- 3.14159265

I'd suggest B.K. Frantzis' "Opening the Energy Gates of Your Body". Great introduction, great practice that's pretty simple and relies on natural mechanics, and it will give you a feel for the lay of the land. Incidentally, if you're interested in the larger field of how qigong and martial arts meet, you really should check out his book "The Power of Internal Martial Arts". He describes many different styles of both. Basically, I think Friend and WBBM can both be right depending on what direction you are coming from. There are some methods of training which are harmful to the body. Qigong is about healing the body and establishing positive routines. So a Qigong system mixed with a physical training method or a martial art or a sport is not going to combine well. As an example... The Chen style of Tai Chi used to be a family martial art with Shaolin origins. One of the members of the family took his family style and combined it with TCM and qigong principles to make that style of Tai Chi. Obviously some moves had to be altered, some created, and some even removed to ensure that everything was in line not only with combat effectiveness, but also with maintaining and increasing physical health. Another example- I used to practice karated before I got into qigong. I've studied some broad mechanics of internal martial arts. I can make a relaxed punch using the internal principles which, externally, looks like a karate punch, and it certainly hits things effectively... but it's not a karate punch. Someone with a keen eye looking at it can tell the difference (when practicing in the mirror, I can tell). Stephen K. Hayes hints at something like this in his first meeting with Masaaki Hatsumi. When Hayes was talking about his karate background, Hatsumi started to perform some of the forms in question. Hayes noted that while the forms were correct, something about them seemed "off", and paired with Hatsumi's body, seemed "silly". I think that, through the course of his training, Hatsumi learned a more full bodied, internally cohesive manner of movement. And when you perform techniques from a style that does not inherently have as much internal cohesion... well, it looks kind of "off". But you can't quite put your finger on it. So long story short, I'm hesitant to say "yes, all qigong can help all martial arts", because, quite frankly, I don't think that's the case. As I said in my earlier post, various martial arts have various training methods to produce bodies and train skills which will help that art manifest in that person. For many Chinese arts, that means specific practices done in a certain way unique to that style to produce a certain practitioner. Those won't necessarily mix well with a martial art style which is trying to do something different. And again, if you are practicing in such a way that is not the best alignment for your physical/energetic body, various qigong styles will run counter to that. I still suggest "Opening the Energy Gates of Your Body". The practice there is general enough that it can fit the bill for general performance enhancement.

The implication being that "arguing" is somehow "bad". Unnecessary judgment, and not necessarily true. It can lead to many a constructive jumping off point, which can lead to many a revealing discussion.

Oh we can go much, much further. For instance: Where is the origination of your judgment which says fighting is always bad and never okay, but just the lesser of two evils?

I don't know about you, but I'm not

Yes. There are lots of different forms of qigong. There are some forms which were designed with specific martial arts in mind, yes, so they may have a certain way of generating things, certain stances they use, and different ways of moving to ensure the internal cohesion of the strength they are trying to generate. Other forms are more general, and their principles can be implemented across the board to increase performance in all levels.

Right. And in order to be able to do so, one must recognize that one may need to fight (such as in the situations you have outlined), and they must practice to do that. Now in the case of some spiritual/internal arts, like certain style of Tai Chi, Bagua, Aikido, etc, the spiritual component can work in tandem with the self defense component. So you can have a practice for cultivation, while at the same time being practical with regards to self defense. You realize that you have errors in your own argument's internal logic, right? You say: 1) These are the situations in which one must fight (as in, to fight in these situations will be okay, even to kill) 2) Teach the next generation that fighting is not alright You're stuck in this labeling scheme of "fighting is bad", "yielding is good", "do good and avoid bad". I don't think the sage would do that. The sage would go where the moment needed to go. That may be turn right or turn left. Order pepsi or coke. Say "hello" or keep walking. Wear red or blue or green or nothing. Punch, kick, run, grapple, spit, roar, growl, cry, laugh, shrug, etc etc etc etc. The sage, being acquainted with all of life and knowing that life can take any number of unpredictable turns, would thus be familiar with all modes of living. There's a saying "it takes two to tango". Meaning, "it takes two to fight". In some sense that's correct. If only one person is fighting, and the other is doing nothing, then you can have several possible things going on: beatdown, massacre, slaughter, murder, torture, humiliation, etc etc etc. Stripping the desire to fight from one half of the equation does nothing to the second half of the equation. That's why there is a HUGE difference between a sparring partner and a genuine determined attacker. Your compliant partner (no matter how full contact the practice) doesn't necessarily fundamentally want to harm you (maybe there are some that do, or maybe it's just MMA hype). A determined attacker will, and when they see red (if they are not a pro at killing- and they are out there), no amount of talking or bearing of your soul will do any good for them. You haven't been attacked. People have merely provided a critical look at your responses. Part of being a sage (I would think) is proper perception (also good in self defense, btw). What is a real attack and what is not? Who is just a loud mouth talker, and who wants to cave your head in? Likewise, on forums and in discussion, who is attacking you, and who is being critical? Who fundamentally doesn't like you, and who is just not laying down as you say something they disagree with? Who is deriding you, and who is seeking your critical response? What are you smoking? One of the (many) problems as I see it is lack of trust. I'm sure that if I let my guard down, others will take advantage of my. Why? I'm thinking it. And if I'm thinking it, I know someone else is thinking it. And while I can trust myself to not do anything, I can't extend such trust to others. So I defend myself. I live how I want to live, but I know that there may come a time when the flow of the Tao may take me in an ugly direction. The perfect sage might get away scott-free. But your average bum? Gonna have to buckle down and realize the reality of the situation: there are people out there who don't play nice. When they push you, are you going to have the ability (read: ABILITY, no comment as to its use or lack thereof) to push back? And do you understand the implications of all of those options?

They would give you the power to not steal ideas from other people for your nanowrimo activities

Depends I guess. Some people say that it's your subconscious which interacts with the energies, and that your subconscious is pretty literal/simple/base in terms of its processing. So let's just say that I don't really trust my subconscious to be looking out for others I would feel more comfortable micromanaging the energies so that I'd be comfortable knowing that nothing too bad is happening as a result of my negligence. But that's just me.

Yes! Way more succinctly put than the way I was roundaboutly hinting at earlier. I for one don't consider rationalizations to be all that enlightened.

You always jump to this point. "You're just afraid of XYZ". As if it is some sort of bad thing. Fear (like pretty much anything, from a cultivation sense, IMO) is a jumping off point, one to be viewed without judgment of good/bad. What is fear? Fear lets us consider multiple options. It makes us aware of our shortcomings. It encourages us to look for blindspots. Of course, and unhealthy, unbalanced fear leads to paranoia, and the same unfounded delusions that any other out of control emotion can lead you to. But in and of itself, as long as it is well grounded, fear is not inherently a bad thing. Exactly. So why not prepare? Match your preparation for the threat. Okay, so you view it as slim. What is your home security like? Do you lock your doors/windows? What parts of town do you visit? Do you travel alone? Do you communicate to people where you are going? Do you carry anything with you that can be used as a weapon? What kinds of clothing do you wear? Are you physically fit to fight or flee? Are you aware when you are walking? Do you exhibit "victim" behaviors, or do things that can draw violent predators to you? If confronted, have you trained to the point where you can handle yourself? Have you gone through the mental training necessary to get through a confrontation? Keep in mind that many of these basic premises of self defense can be learned in minutes and trained into a routine in your daily life. So it's not like you'll have to climb up a mountain and learn ninjutsu for 15 years to become a super assassin. But don't kid yourself into thinking that you can just forget about it. Because the chance, even if slim, is still there. And chance favors the prepared mind. You do realize that having a screwed up societal life actually makes it MORE likely that you're going to get into a physical confrontation with someone? Right. This is something martial arts will teach you. At least, martial arts that are geared towards life and death, practical self defense. The people who I know of who are most "gung ho" to "man up" and fight are the people who have never been in fights before. Fighting sucks. Even if you win the fight, you have to worry about retaliation, word spreading about you being a fighter, tales getting spun, people coming up to you to test you out, your name and associations getting pased around. People don't quite realize how dangerous it is. And the people who DO know, and who thank their lucky stars every day that nothing bad has happened to them, avoid fighting at all costs. I don't know if you've ever seen this, but two tough looking dudes come into a place, they look at each other, size each other up, nod, and move on. They don't want trouble. They don't want to start shit. They just go about their business. So perhaps you should adjust your view of martial arts. Again, you are assuming the capability for such an action. There may be mitigating factors. Are you with someone else? Can THEY run? If I'm walking down the street with my girlfriend, I might know I can handle myself, but what about her? I know what I can do if I trip and fall trying to escape, but what about her? What if I'm with a small child? What if I'm with an older person? What if I'm in unfamiliar territory? What if I'm in familiar territory? All of these things MUST be taken into consideration if you plan to practically implement your philosophy. And if you are not trained, or unaware of these things, you are very likely to overlook something that can be your blind spot. Do yourself a favor and learn how to do it right. If you never have to use it, you'll still have it. Better to have and not need, than need and not have. Or is that just materialistic hording philosophy extended to self defense knowledge? Hmm.

You'd really love for that to be my position, wouldn't you? But that's NEVER been my position. One should do what needs to be done in the situation in order to resolve it. There are times when we must talk. And there are times when we must fight. I don't know what kind of life you have led, but surely you have encountered people who you cannot talk with. People who will take and take and take. No, not just assholes in the park who don't realize how much space they are taking up, who don't realize they are shouting profanities when kids might be around. I'm talking about people who take sadistic pleasure in having power over people, and using that power to hurt others. There might be some assholes in a park, and you avoid them and go elsewhere in the park to have a picnic with your family. Okay. That's great. What about the people who actually walk through the park actively looking for people to harass? No amount of packing up and leaving resolves issues with those people. Because they won't stop. Give them what they want, and they want more, and find pleasure in taking it from you in the most painful ways. For these people, you must confront them. Sometimes you must confront them physically. For all things there is a season. I'd say that a sage would know when to talk, when to fight, when to flee, and when to advance. Of course, to do these things effectively, one must know HOW to do them. One must practice the art of fighting so that, if the time comes to fight, you can do what you need to do. NEVER have I said one should go around looking for fights. Or to just fight people who disagree with you. That has been your mis-characterization of my position ever since we wondered whether the sages were martial artists. Sometimes you can't talk. Sometimes talking is pointless. I've asked you through all of these discussions what your practical suggestions are for people who can't be talked to, and who will not fundamentally accept another person's right to exist unmolested. And you skirt around the issue and try to make it seem like I'm just out to bop people over the head with my big stick. The most powerful weapon is the one most suited to the job. Weapons are only effective insofar as they can affect your opponent. If you meet an opponent who is unaffected by words, you must do something else. If all you have are you words.... then against that opponent, you have nothing. Just please remember to make this distinction: I am not suggesting that we fight. I am merely suggesting that we don't "not fight" as a unilateral proposition. I am suggesting we do the right thing at the right time. Sometimes that may be fighting. So we should prepare and learn to fight. We may never even have to fight. Sometimes that may be talking. So we should prepare and learn to talk. Though sometimes you may never have a situation in which you can talk your way out of it.

This is assuming a couple of things: 1) That you can easily give up the thing that they want 2) You have a place you can easily go. So.... Well it certainly sounds like it! "Hey, I want your daughter. Give her to me or I'll hurt somebody." "Oh, well I don't want to be violent. Here you go. And while I'm at it, take my house because I am leaving anyway." So when you are face to face with someone who wants to hurt you or a loved one, what is the "proper" answer, hm? And what happens if there is no place else to leave to? You leave, and have to go somewhere, and are suddenly encroaching on someone else's existence. Well that's just ripe for more problems! Have you really thought this through, the ramifications of just running away and letting people do as they please? Imagine if we raised kids like that! No, people have always had wants. "I want food. I should follow the herds if I don't want to die. Oh, look, I can get food without packing up and moving every couple of weeks. Yippee." That's great assuming you have bounteous amounts of unoccupied land and resources elsewhere. And when that is not the case? People tend to be much more cooperative when they're dead. I'm only really half joking. "Only a warrior chooses pacifism. Others are condemned to it." And when you have nowhere to run and hide to? Death, is it? Except you'd only be teaching them what you think "right" and "good" are, which come from... what, exactly? Getting raped in the ass and saying "thank you can I please have another because I accept whatever life has to offer" is supposed to be "good" and "right", because, you know, you aren't being violent and fighting or, god forbid, killing? Would you really choose a life of slavery as long as you don't make a fuss? That's just fucked up. Right, because the only time we kill people is when we want something they have, and it is always wrong

Right. And their lives are shit. Right. That doesn't mean they are free. Given the choice, do you think they would continue living their lives, do you think they'd choose to keep watching the sky pass them by in a little window, or see it in the open for themselves? Oh, that's right, they don't get a choice, because they are powerless. They don't get to make the choice between whether they see the sky or not. Someone else makes it for them. So they can either choose to accept it or not choose to accept it. Accepting it will make it easier on them. Fighting it will not. But nothing they do will change their circumstances, because they are without power. "Acceptance" when you don't have a choice in the matter is meaningless. It's the same as saying you're a "moral" person because you have never stolen from someone, despite never being in a situation where you may be forced to steal. Or kill. Or lie. Etc etc etc. Easy to take the high road when you never have to choose it. Your "sages" in prison didn't give it up. They had it forcibly taken away. They could either accept it and live happily in prison, or reject it and live miserably in prison. Either way, they'd be in prison at the command of another person. No power. No agency. Nobody cares. It's as good as a self preservation mechanism. Given the choice, how many would choose it? Some people do choose prison. But not because of same sagely wisdom. It's because that is the only life they know. They know how to survive, thrive, even, in prison. But when they are faced with choices? The freedom to choose what you do, where you eat, what job you have, what to pay for, and the consequences of those actions... they'd rather be in prison. That's not sagacious wisdom. That's base animal survival instincts. You need to find some better role models. Right, because, you know, this is how you describe people in prison, right? Oh, wait, no, you don't. Prisoners don't lead people. They are led. They are supported, and the taxpayers feel their weight. So... huh. And what do you do when you stand between an attacker and a loved one? The attacker is determined to physically assault you and your loved one. What do you do? What do you do when laying down your weapons and refusing to fight becomes an act of willfully allowing harm and suffering to occur to another? Learn to apply your philosophy to reality, then we'll talk.

Whoops.

Well he's had several car crashes which shattered his spine. He refused to have a spinal fusion and spent the next several months healing his body in such a way as to preserve the energy flows. So.... there's that. And on top of that, he's also the inheritor to a meditation lineage. Maybe part of his meditative practices involve getting over the need to fix a hair loss issue which may be genetic in nature, and instead come to grips with how things are. Soooooo.... there's that. [edit] As to his weight: check him out in some of his recent videos. He's lost a lot of weight, and he's quite mobile and fluid, despite his past issues. He mentioned that in the TTB's interview- he's always eaten a lot, and he kept up his eating regiment even when his physical regiment couldn't keep up do to injuries. All things considered, he's doing pretty damn good Not to mention his material is quite good But hey, to each their own