Sloppy Zhang

True. The only people who can finish this argument are the people who have been called out. And you don't really see them stepping up too often. Then some of the people who DO step up, well, there's a lot of debate about whether they are who they say they are. Some people say guys like BT are real internal guys, others say they aren't, and are using external shortcuts. Others say so-and-so is a great internal guy, then that person gets the crap beat out of them, and the people are saying, "well he wasn't using REAL such-and-such", or "well it was a fight in the ring" and whatever. So, yeah. It'd be nice if we had a modern day version of Yang Luchan, Yang Banhou, Chen Fake, Sun Lutang, or any of the other famous internal guys that everyone likes to tell stories of. Who did these guys teach? Do any of these students have these capabilities? Are these just tall tales? Were these people just geniuses? Were they just lying completely? Was there a grain of truth?

Be careful with dreams, because they can conform frighteningly well to your expectations. If you think that in a dream you'll be able to speak with God, with a higher power, have siddhis, be king of the world, then guess what? You will be. But when you wake up (or maybe even years later), you'll realize you weren't doing anything but (literally) living in your dreams, conversing with a mental construct of your own making, who just spit out the answers you wanted to hear, with absolutely no relevance to any other type of reality. If you think you really do have prophetic dreams, then you need to work on developing that to a degree where you can figure out if they are even reliably prophetic. If you had a dream where you were eating a turkey sandwich, then two days later you eat a turkey sandwich, well, to me that means absolutely nothing. I think (and dream) of things all the time that don't happen, and then I think (and dream) of things all the time that do happen. Does that mean I'm prophetic? Or does it just mean that my mind covers enough mental territory to cover all the bases? In order to prevent self delusion, I think one needs to investigate and develop these phenomena until you can really be sure that what you have is, in fact, a form of precognition. And that comes WAY before figuring stuff like pyrokinesis.

What part of the conversation are you referring? I know a bit of Japanese, and could understand most of what he was saying. I remember the part where he was asked what practices prepared him for golden dragon body, and he responded with kunlun neigong, red phoenix, five element (maybe something else? Don't recall) and she relayed that list exactly. There are a few situations in which he's not quite sure how he wants to phrase it himself (for example, when talking about the energy that he feels around Max), he wasn't sure if even "energy" was the right word, so he spent some time kicking around some terminology to himself, then settled on a particular phrase. When the translator got it, rather than relaying the hoops Kan jumped through to arrive at the phrasing, she just relayed the phrasing he settled on at the end. Japanese in particular is an interesting language in that there are various ways of tacking extra words/phrases onto a word to change the "flavor" of the word, or the context that you want to put it in, but doesn't add any literal meaning, so sometimes you can translate into english with a lot fewer words than was actually said (and then sometimes it takes more words in english to convey the meaning that was intended). So again, if you could point out some specific times in the interview, I'll give it another listen!

Thanks for posting this! Interesting stuff.

Thanks for letting us know! Looks awesome

True though. BT is one of the few who are actually teaching their art in a manner that builds conditioning of the body to use the techniques, as well as actively working to get it recognized in a tournament level. Back when I frequented bullshido (about a year and a half ago) there were a couple threads dedicated to this. Mostly stuff from sanshou/sanda, finding people who studied tai chi, watching videos, and then finding techniques that actually looked like those used in the forms which were used in fights. There were a couple of really surprisingly good quality fights and vids, as well as techniques. In the time I was there, a couple people tried to come in and slam tai chi, saying stuff like "it sucks" and things like that, and they pretty much got run out of all the threads- the veterans were like, "you don't know what you're talking about, tai chi doesn't suck in and of itself, you just gotta train right". Of course, that raises the question- are they using IMA skills, or are they just strong, conditioned fighters that are using moves which look like tai chi? The bullshido guys don't really care- it's on video, and looks about the same. But to an IMA practitioner, looks may not be good enough, so even the grounds for finding a suitable IMA practitioner to take this challenge would be pretty tough!

Others are correct in pointing out the dangers of practices such as these, especially in an uninformed way. No, this is not some forms of "negative vibes", it's not just some psychological "holding you back" statement. It is a legitimate view of the pitfalls that exist in a path such as this, and if one is ever to succeed, one must know the dangers, and know how to avoid them. Knowing is half the battle. The problem is not necessarily in the form itself, it's in the people and their mindset going into the form. Many people living a "modern lifestyle" in a "developed country" just do not have the natural conditioning or intuitive awareness of healthy body alignments that people in the past, and in other lifestyles, possess. They don't know about opening the kwa, they don't know how to protect the knees and the ankles. There are people who are "healthy", and by the time they hit their mid 20's, have a bunch of knee and ankle problems because their exercise regiment did not address or protect those joints. Not everyone has the knowledge of anatomy to know what is a natural alignment and what is an unnatural alignment. On top of that, they hear sayings like, "pain is impurities leaving your body", "pain is something you must work through to build strength and chi", and don't know that standing in a NEGATIVE alignment will only produce PROBLEMS. Again, this is not about negative vibes or psychological tricks for success. This is a fact of the human body. So, just a word of caution to someone about to get into these practices, especially someone who isn't that active, or who is not familiar with how to protect the joints (especially the method of doing so in meditation, qigong, and martial arts), take it slow. If you feel pain, STOP. Check the alignment. Check how the teacher is teaching, and check your own. Find other teachers and other styles, see how they do it. No, don't listen to crap about "jack of all trades, master of none", or "looking around at other styles will just lead you to neglect your own"- some teachers (who may or may not be legitimately connected to a lineage) really do think they are practicing the right way, and wind up with themselves, or students, having serious health problems. And yes, this is from experience! One of my karate teachers thought he'd learn to incorporate some qigong practices into his karate to boost performance, didn't both to check where he learned it from, verify it with other sources, then him and others, who were practicing it the wrong way, wound up with some serious joint problems. They thought they got a "boost in strength", which lasted a couple of years, then their bodies literally broke! So just be careful.

As long as you don't emit vibes to attract cars, you'll be fine! By looking both ways, you are subconsciously telling yourself that you'll get hit, thus, you will!

Do you have a handgun? How often do you carry it with you? To work? To the grocery store? In your car? Will you actually be able to use it if you need to? Will you even be able to access it if you need to? Would you be able to justify its use, to yourself, to the law, to the friends and family of the "victim" (if you can't prove that it was a reasonable use of force, YOU are now the criminal, and they the victim) should you use it? You don't want to learn martial arts under the assumption that you might need to use it, but then you turn around and use the existence of guns as a support for your argument? No offense, but.... I don't think this is a very well thought out, or supportable position. The existence of guns does not automatically negate the usefulness of actually learning martial arts for practical application. And just because you learn martial arts to actually use them (keeping in mind that you could also be using them for spiritual cultivation, energetic cultivation, etc etc, and don't HAVE to use them for actual use) does not mean you are sending out negative vibes which will attract fights and other forms of violence to you, which will leave you stabbed and shot and lying in the gutter expelling your last breath. Perhaps you could explain a bit more why learning martial arts for actual combat usage is not appropriate?

Computers are also not mentioned in the Bible, so Christians hoping to follow in the footsteps of Christ would not be helped along with a computer, since there was no mention. Of course, since we can't go back in time and show the writers of the Bible a computer, we'd never be able to know beyond our own surmising, nor would we ever get proof to the contrary. My point is that, even if you view the Tao Te Ching as philosophy, or the Bible as spiritual guidance, you can't just limit yourself to exactly what is written. Lao Tzu did not speak much of training martial arts, nor does he speak of cooks- does that mean one can't discover the tao through cooking? He doesn't mention comedians- does that mean a comedian cannot discover the tao through comedy? Does that mean they cannot apply the philosophy of the Tao Te Ching to either of their craft, just because Lao Tzu didn't write it? Does it mean a Christian, or for that matter, any follower of any religion/philosophy, can't discover a universal truth through their own microcosm? I do not think so. The notion of a philosopher sitting around and thinking is great. They give us good ideas, and give us much to think about. But if you really think the Tao Te Ching philosophy (or Christian religious views, or Buddhist views, or anything else) is really a universal truth, then the truth should be self evident EVERYWHERE. Lover, fighter, philosopher, artist, cook, comedian, actor, banker, etc etc etc etc. You don't need to say, "well it's not written in the Tao Te Ching/Bible/etc so we should not spend our times on something that isn't advocated". It's a rather limiting approach, IMHO, to do so.

Keeping in mind that I do not research and study every known sage of history or legend... I don't think that all were. Just like I don't think that all of them were physical alchemists, diviners, healers, tradesmen, teachers, etc etc. I think that they all realized the tao through their unique path. So I think some of them could have reached it through martial arts. As a consequence of realizing the tao, they see (saw?) the tao in everything, thus, they could do anything the situation required. Which includes fighting. Were they all martial artists as we might call them today? Probably not. Were some of them? Probably. Did they all realize the tao? Yes. Could they have fought, had the tao flowed in that direction? I believe so, yes. But again, as someone had pointed out in the taoist magic thread I started, us observing might see that they are doing various different things- fighting, magic, etc etc, but to a sage, they are just following the energy, changing, and following again. But to us, we wee a mountain moved, or an army of enemies defeated. So in the case of a sage, hard to say. [edit] Just typing into google "tao te ching 15", I came upon a translation from here Interesting translation given our discussion, and useful. I've added bold to the line in particular. Now maybe that's a good translation, maybe not, but it conveys the point I'm trying to make: "Can you remain unmoving till the right action arises by itself?" In the context of the martial arts, this is not to seek a fight, nor is it to constantly avoid a fight because you think fighting is not the way. It is to not make a judgment, it is to just observe, and act when it is necessary. Now maybe it is to fight. Maybe it is to do something else. Maybe it is to do nothing. All of these things are EQUALLY possible. The whole, "well if you know how to fight then you seek out more fights" or "well you should avoid all fights" is, when talking from this kind of taoist perspective, very much NOT the way of the tao, because you have already made up your mind regardless of the situation! Rather, see what the situation calls for, where the energy is flowing, and act in accordance with that. Maybe fight, maybe not. In seeking tao, I'd say don't get stuck in one or the other. As per our discussion in the other thread, I'm not advocating "going out and fighting" per se, I'm advocating being able to fight competently should you need to, as such, I can't really support the "avoid all fights", because while it's a good strategy, it's not always what the situation calls for. So, like fighting- use it when the situation calls for it.

No, you have still dodged, on two occasions, an important question that I have asked you: What would YOU do if you were in a situation such that fighting were unavoidable? What would YOU do if you saw someone being attacked, or otherwise physically victimized, and you lived in an area that SFJane described, where police response can take upwards of 20 mins? Would you speak up? Would you step forward? Would you keep your head down? Would you yield? I would like to say that I agree with this 100%. Looking back, I can see my own causes in many of the fights I got into. Of course, each of those gave me important lessons. But still, my own fault. I can see how stupid it is, and I agree that many fights are caused by notions of "strength", "weakness", labels, etc etc. Many people think they have to fight, when in reality they do not have so. So many situations are our own doing. Many, but not all. Well, no physical causes. If you believe your karma puts you in situations, then it's your own fault. I don't know how I feel about that. But there are some instances in which you are just not the cause of the situation, other than that you are there to (potentially) be a victim.

I don't really know what you mean by "there's no way to defend against that". Not sure what you're referring to when you say "that", could you clarify? I agree with you that bad stuff can happen no matter what. But just because you are cognizant of the risk, does not mean you are afraid. Just because you take precautions, does not mean you are living in fear.e I added emphasis to the word "philosophical", because that's really what you're talking about. But philosophy alone does nothing- you have to apply it. I think, with the philosophy present in the tao te ching, you can apply it everywhere. Lao Tzu did not say every situation in which one can carry out the philosophy he presented, and if he tried, it would be futile- the potential applications are limitless. One can certainly be in combat yet still be in accordance with the tao te ching. Combat is an aspect of life. It may happen to some more frequently than others. It may not happen to some people at all. But it does not mean combat is going against wu-wei. Rather, combat can be the area in which wu-wei is realized. Again, as Jess O pointed out, not everyone wants to travel the path of the martial arts cultivator. Not everyone is willing to do what Miyamoto Musashi did, fighting duels to the death his entire life before realizing enlightenment (of some kind, at least that's what I hear) But just because you choose not to do that, does not mean that combat should be avoided. What should be avoidance is stagnation. And if avoiding fights is carried to such a degree that it causes stagnation, well, perhaps it's time to examine your beliefs. I agree that one should study for the right reason. But I also think that one should USE it in the right reason (and sometimes that DOES mean NOT using it) I find it rather irksome that it's such a prevalent belief that, "if you want to learn martial arts to actually be able to fight, then you're doing it wrong, stop seeking fights, that's not the way". I also find it rather irksome that people live under the belief (yes, it is a belief, because it is believed despite many situations which are to the contrary) that, "well we live in a world of guns, learning how to fight is meaningless". That's great. I agree completely. And you know what? Sometimes it works out that way. But it doesn't always work out that way. And it doesn't always work out that way for everyone. Did you ever see a friend of yours attacked? Did you ever see an innocent person who you didn't know attacked? Have you stood on the sidelines and watched as people were victimized, and you wanted to help, but couldn't? Because I have, and it sucks. I do not think that's wu-wei. I don't think that's compassionate. I don't think that is fitting the behavior of a sage, enlightened person, or even just a well developed human being. Keeping your head down is great when that conforms with the situation, when it follows wu-wei to keep your head down. But what if keeping your head down causes harm, leads to stagnation, and corruption? I ask you again: what would YOU do? Again, this is kind of a warped way of looking at things. Just because some people have guns, some people use guns, and some people are shot, does not automatically mean if you are going to be in an encounter, all of your martial arts will be useless because the person will have a gun. That is just not the case. I'm sure if you think a bit, maybe back to what you described at Job Corp, you'd realize how this exaggerated way of looking at things is not doing you much benefit- did every potentially dangerous person you've ever met carry a gun? Did ever potentially dangerous situation that you may have gotten yourself into end with someone shooting you? I think not. Plenty of people injured, if not killed, are done so with weapons such as knives, or other blunt weapons, or are done so with fists. Some maybe are even ganged up on (three or four or maybe five people) and are beaten. Maybe a martial art like bagua, which can take on 8 people at a time, would be quite helpful in those situations...... Now would you want a bagua which you KNOW works, or which you BELIEVE works based on what your teacher has told you? See this is what I like about the internal martial arts- you don't HAVE to fight. Their use is not JUST for fighting. As Gerard has pointed out, you can go your whole life and never fight, but still reap benefits, physical, energetic, spiritual, etc, of your practice. And if following wu-wei leads you into a battle, you can follow wu-wei out of a battle. But, you've got to have the tools to do that. And that includes training in a spiritual discipline that actually lets you DO what it is it says it can do, and if it's a martial discipline, actually lets you DO what it says it can do (namely, fight people). If it's both, and you expect to use it as both, you gotta train it as both.

Yes, I agree with all of this. My point is that: in the slim chance that it might happen, do you want something that you believe works, or something that you know works? I want something that I know works. Again, great, I agree 100% Again, you've got to justify the use of force. The person you mace, even if they may have been acting sketchy, could sue you for hurting THEM. Competency in martial arts, especially something like bagua, which could be used to deflect and evade, could easily avoid these problems. There will be no issue with necessary use of force, and you can avoid further legal problems. Same thing that I said to Gerard- preparation does not mean the presence of fear. Do you keep a flashlight in your home with fresh batteries? Do you have a fire escape plan? Do you lock your door at night? It's not fear, it's precaution. It's knowing the risks, knowing the chances, and even though you know it's slim, you play it safe. I learned karate because the kids at school were bullying me. It was a great decision. Bullies are tricky. Going to teachers and parents does not work. But at the same time, kicking the crap out of them doesn't work either. It's kinda the same with necessary use of force- being the good guy sucks. You have to defend yourself, but you also can't hurt the other person, because of legal action (or if you're lofty, you take moral aversion to beating up someone even if one could say they deserve it) However, karate, and other self defense methods, teach DECISIVE techniques which disengage from the harassers, let them know you are physically capable, that you do not want to get into a fight, but if they press it, you know how to defend yourself. You don't have to hurt someone to send a message. Their inability to hurt you can send a message. After I got rid of the bully situation (elementary school), I NEVER had a problem with bullies in my own situation. But do you know what I DID have? Bullies in OTHER peoples' lives. People who were bullies to someone else. So, what do you do then? Mind your own business? I tried that. I watched as some guy got harassed by the same two guys every day. When the two guys were around, I did nothing. When the two were away, I tried to console the kid. It was a big school, I had moved to a new district, there were some rough people in the school, it was middle school, 6th grade, and there were 7th and 8th graders who were more fully developed physically, and some were in gangs. I wanted to help this kid, but I didn't want to get into a physical fight with a gang. Well, that kid decided to hit the gym himself, beat the crap out of one of his bullies, got suspended from school, joined a gang, and I don't know where he went after that. Humans are physical. We live in a physical world. We have physical abilities. We have physical problems. That is a FACT. That is the human condition. What kind of wu-wei would ignore a basic reality of the human condition? I am not advocating that one seeks fights. I am advocating that people are COMPETENT and CAPABLE when a physical fight seeks THEM. You keep thinking that! Then try stepping outside one day. Oh, that's right, I forgot: Without going outside, you may know the whole world. Without looking through the window, you may see the ways of heaven. The farther you go, the less you know. Thus the sage knows without travelling; He sees without looking; He works without doing. - Tao Te Ching, 47 (translation by Gia-fu Feng and Jane English) The legends say Zhang Sanfeng (a.k.a. Sloppy Zhang ) created tai chi (though we can trace it historically to Chen village... mostly) B.K. Frantzis talks about in high levels of bagua that one no longer fights based on what the opponents are doing- but that they just flow with the energy. To an external observer, it looks like a fight. In a taoist magic thread, I believe it was stig (if it is not, my apologies to who it was) who said that the magician just changes with the energy, other people perceive it as magic (wording it like that, maybe it was goldisheavy? again, apologies for my lack of recollection!) So to the sage, he/she may just be walking the circle, flowing with energy. Of course, both of them produce the same physical result: success in a fight. There are people in this world who take offense to the fact that you are living, breathing, and in their field of vision. There are people in this world who take offense to the fact that someone else (you may or may not know) is living, breathing, and in their field of vision, as well as your own. They want to end, or seriously disrupt that life. How would YOU deal with that scenario?

It was a deliberate overstatement made sarcastically. Which is why I even put sarcasm tags. I guess sarcasm really is hard to convey over the internet My point is, guns, in many situations, are overkill. Guns are not always used, and there is not always a reason to use guns. In fact, in many areas (at least in the US) there is what's called "necessary use of force". In the event that you are in an altercation and that altercation is being investigated by law, you are going to need to defend the actions you took. If you pull out a glock and blow someone away, you better have a damn good reason. And, depending on your area, unless you have a bunch of licenses and stuff, you might not even have the gun accessible when you need it. And even if you carry it openly, the only bad guys you are going to deter are the small fries- determined attackers, such as those intent on killing you, or those with guns, are going to do so, even if you are carrying your gun. There are an infinite amount of possible situations in which hand to hand self defense would be relevant and applicable. Has it ever occurred to anybody that the rigid aversion to fighting and combat because it is "not wu-wei" is, in and of itself, an obstruction to wu-wei? If a mentally deranged person encounters you on the street, and possibly starts physically harassing you (keeping in mind that this is a situation that can happen even in a "safe" area even in broad daylight), and you sit there and take it because "fighting is not wu-wei", then you are effectively sitting there stagnating as someone proceeds to do whatever they please with you, as you await whatever fate to befall you. I have a little story about when I first learned wing chun that illustrates this: My new teacher was instructing me on how to use a 45 degree angle of my arm to block a wide arced punched (like a haymaker punch). I had a karate background, so he told me, "not rigid like karate, you wanna be relaxed." So I relaxed my arm. My partner swung, hit my arm, and my open palm smacked me right in the face. My teacher told me, "relax, not limp, firm, but not rigid". Just because you decide that fighting is not your approach to life, does not mean that you just turn into a limp noodle as soon as a physically tense situation starts, and should any fights break out, you just don't do anything. Again, avoidance is most of the battle. In no way do I disagree with what anyone has said on the issue. Most systems of self defense teach avoidance strategies, basic sociology/psychology, mentality of groups, attackers, victims, etc etc. Knowing the neighborhood, knowing the dangerous parts of town, knowing where is safe and unsafe during what times of day will do a lot. But, again, as SFJane illustrated, sometimes it just doesn't happen that you don't get into fights. Maybe part of wu-wei is finding that you've been put into sticky situations, and knowing how to get out of them in one piece, whether you need to adopt the attributes of firm or soft. It just seems rigid that one will not even consider the option that perhaps sometimes fighting happens, and maybe knowing how to fight would be, you know, fitting of a man of the tao..... but I guess not everyone's looking at it like that. I'll try to avoid using sarcasm when speaking with you in the future, then

Because every time someone wants to hurt you, it's with a gun. [/sarcasm] Because avoidance works 100% of the time [/sarcasm] Take a look at SFJane's rather excellent post- sometimes shit happens, and you are there!

Excellent point! There are lots of lurkers here- people who read but are not members. There are also lots of members who read but don't post. So when you post something, who knows how far it reaches? Maybe someone years from now will do a web search and find the material that you posted here. So to remove it, or just not even post it, because of how you feel about the "quality" of discussion in the present, well, who knows what you have denied to present anonymous readers and future seekers? Though I'd contend that it's not a statement of fact, but a statement of opinion, I think the context should be taken into consideration. If it's one thread, been a pretty vicious back and forth, a lot of harsh statements, leading up to a final, "you're an asshole", then I don't think banning should be considered. I'd also suggest against an immediate temporary suspension. If it's a heated discussion, and someone flings something one way, well, sometimes that happens. Tell the people to chill, and encourage them to walk away. If they can't, close the thread for a couple of days (but then re-open it), or send them a warning via PM to chill, or if they won't, temporarily suspend them for a day or two, but then let them come back. However, if two or more people are chasing after one another, and each new thread they both talk in turns into a battle ground for their personal grudges, well more serious action is in order, I think.

Well, if you've got an experienced teacher, who is also sensitive to energy or familiar with other systems, try asking them specifically about another system you are into, and if it will mesh. If you ask a general question about combining systems, you will get the general answer that sometimes it's okay, sometimes it's not! For me, a guy practicing on his own, I gotta feel it out. Frantzis' published material is my base that I work with. My core practice routine. Anything else I do either meshes well with that, or I don't practice it. In the past, exploring other systems sounded like they'd go together in theory, but in application I felt my body was starting to go out of whack. So I dropped the practice immediately, and resumed with my usual practices for about two weeks, then tried again. I'd repeat that process about three times, then drop the system. Usually stuff I do that isn't strictly Frantzis' material is stuff that is natural that I've been doing my whole life, or things that arose spontaneously during practice, or things that have meshed pretty much instantly as soon as I picked them up. To be honest though, the kind of stuff that will mesh, for me, anyway, is few and far between. Frantzis' methods are pretty unique for me, as are their feel (again, for me). It's water method, but even it doesn't always blend well (for me) with other water method practices, even if the theory is the same. I can learn a lot about myself and the way I'm doing things by looking into other systems, and talking with their practitioners, but doing their practice just doesn't yield the same result (for me). But the thing is, most well developed, complete systems have their own ways of doing things that other systems do. There's really no need to mix systems if you are working with a complete system. If you have an incomplete system, or incomplete knowledge, studying another system can teach you what you don't know. If you're a beginner, or even just want another perspective, another system can give it to you. However, with a full system, combining arts probably isn't necessary. I'm not familiar with wild goose qigong, so I dunno how full of a system it is, even in theory. So feel it out!

Oh, I completely agree with you! But not everyone else holds that same viewpoint, and it's surprising how many INSTITUTIONS do not hold that same view. Which is why my point in saying be careful about schools saying they'll teach you stuff. A lot of times you just give up a shit ton of money and they tell you what books to read, then send you on your merry way, which you could have done for free anyway! So either you're a brilliant person who succeeds in self study, or you wind up screwing yourself and/or other people up.

I dunno what else to say man. Looks can be deceiving. Ever learned how to stage fight? As in, make it look real without actually hitting anybody? (well sometimes you do hit them, but everyone is still in control) I dunno. Learn the method. A lot of people have been doing bagua for a long time and, well, the only people who I've ever heard of with problems are people who were either doing it wrong, or learning it from someone else who was doing it wrong. This is why you hear all these warnings about internal arts, that you have to do them right or you'll just wind up hurting yourself. Because if you just try to copy the movements, without learning the finer points of the stepping, you are probably going to run into exactly the problems you are describing. It's not mumbo jumbo. It's finesse. Me too

Because it's cool.

Perhaps you should look more closely into a comment before just saying, "ah, this is obviously of no usefulness and serves no purpose to learning!" Perhaps examine why you say that? Perhaps examine the motivations for the person saying that? Perhaps learn a little bit about the person? Perhaps examine yourself and what about it you don't like? The reaction and thoughts it provokes in you? Why that's the case? If we just "don't accept" things that we don't like because of a perceived lack of value, well that's not learning, that's just selectively picking things that reinforce whatever your current view is.

Moderation should not be based on who is supposedly "enlightened", who brings "quality", or anything of the sort, as that is entirely opinionated. I find it interesting that you decided to specifically call out certain people, as some members on that list (goldisheavy and ralis are two prime examples) contribute INCREDIBLY thoughtful and insightful posts to this forum consistently.... however... Where is the problem with the members I've named? They bring an unpopular perspective. Sometimes it can be direct and abrasive, sure. But that does not lessen the quality of their posts! And it CERTAINLY does not necessitate any censorship or removal of posts! You could just as easily add yourself to the list, because while you provide interesting insights, one first has to get past your condescending tone before finding anything of value! Somehow you've assigned yourself the role of spiritual barometer, letting us all know how high or low we are on a measure of spiritual growth and value, and somehow you seem to believe that moderation should be based on that. However, since there is no legitimate way of verifying it, perceived spiritual advancement (or lack thereof), should not be the standard for moderation. And I do not think it is. I really do like the moderation here. I too am not too hot about the "cheerleader comment" thing, because, well, there are a LOT of different ways different meanings can be gotten from one term, and, well, I guess it's too late now, anyway. Moderation I think should be the last step taken, and only in situations in which direct negative attacks are carried out, and I think I should add on a consistent basis. For example, Gerard's post above spoke directly about certain members, and I responded directly to another member. Technically, you could say that it is no longer discussing ideas, but discussing people, and may require moderator action. But I do not think that I launched any sort of personal attack on Gerard, and I do not take Gerard's post to be a personal attack (at least in my case as one of the name's mentioned, and I am greatly honored to be included in that list, as all of the other people are great people and great contributors to this forum in general, as is Gerard, so I'm glad he thought of me along with them!). It was an opinion on certain members here, and everyone is entitled to their opinion. I'm not bothered by it, and hopefully Gerard is not bothered by mine. I'm not bothered by the expression of another member's opinion, and I certainly hope that another member is not bothered by mine. But if two+ people consistently started launching personal attacks at people consistently across several threads, well, that could require action.

You'd be surprised, in a lot of places, "actual study of the subject" pretty much entails "just reading the book". Non, thanks for giving the link. Unfortunately, I don't know much about this field, so I can't comment on it. Have you checked the admissions requirements? Seems like they got some pretty high standards. Two years prior to transfer + three years of their program, that's 5 years of education you're looking at, at least. What is the tuition for this place?