Qi vs. Energy - Kendall again

[Guest guest]

I was at first very much taken aback by Kendall's position that the

translation of the Qi concept into " Energy " by the French was a mistake of

translation, but I think I have managed to come to understand better what

Kendall is talking about.

 

Ground rules: From here on in, if I speak about " Energy " I refer to the

French (mis)understanding of Qi. When I refer to energy, I simply mean the

scientific concept.

 

For the sake of simplicity, let us just assume for the moment that the

ideas we came up with last night are in fact correct. Now it is important

to distinguish between people that today speak of " Energy " is relation to

Qi that actually understand Qi, but just use the word " Energy " because

everybody else does, and those that use the word " Energy " in relation to Qi

and therefore attribute false characteristics to it. This understanding is

vital in avoiding unnecessary arguments/misunderstandings.

 

So what is the difference between the French " Qi " and the Chinese Qi? I

will go through point form a comparison of key comparisons:

* The Chinese know that Qi is everywhere and is everything, the French

emphasise mostly that it is everywhere.

* The Chinese Qi is much more encompassing of all manifestation in this

world, energy and matter, whereas for the French it is mostly about energy.

* The Chinese Qi is much more embodied, empirical and immanent. The

French Qi is a bit more abstract, mysterious and mystical.

This difference is small, yet it makes all the difference in the

world. Generally when the typical TCM student imagines Qi, he imagines

some sort of field of energy flowing like a force field or electricity

through a wire travelling the meridians of the body. This is not

necessarily a mistake, but for what it omits - the physical reality of what

we see, and especially feel, right in front of us, is also Qi. This subtle

energy I feel on my fingertips when I do Qigong is Qi certainly, but then

this computer table and this chair I am working on is also Qi - it is both

the subtle and the mundane.

 

Now acupuncture (for all but the most intuitively/energically talented) is

the manipulation of not just any Qi, but the Qi of the body. This does not

mean that when you stick a needle in a certain acupuncture node that some

sort of (let's say) electromagnetic field is shifted and adjusted and

therefore you get better. It means that when you stick the needle in you

are effecting changes in the physical body, affecting blood flow and

neuronal firing patterns and hormone releases, etc (also a manifestation of

Qi, just of a certain type, in this case Zheng Qi manipulation affecting

Ying and Wei Qi) and therefore it gets better, and THEN we see/feel/sense

changes in this said electromagnetic field.

 

Let me try to explain it another way. When we needle a patient and try to

elicit a De Qi sensation, we commonly make the mistake of saying that this

undefined Qi moved, therefore the patient felt something physically

happening in their body. This is not quite right. A better way to explain

what the Chinese meant by Qi is to say that the patient felt something

physically happen in their body, full stop. And that is Qi, because Qi is

everything and everywhere, so of course everything that you feel is Qi

moving.

 

I think in this the idea of Qi in acupuncture is much closer to the idea of

" feeling " rather than " Energy " . In some senses, this type is Qi IS

feeling, though it may be too subtle for everyone to consciously

register. This one requires a bit of an oblique explanation as well: when

I do a massage, I know when I have done a good job because I can feel into

the patient's body somehow. I don't know the mechanism of how this works

exactly, but I can tell you that my hands and fingers get pretty warm in

the process, even if I am doing just point-pressing techniques. Some say

this is because " Energy " was transferred to my hands, but this basically

explains nothing. The Chinese concept is that the Qi follows the

thought/attention. When I massage I put myself in a state of mind where

100% attention on the feelings from my hands and fingers, and what they

detect of the patient's musculature. Blood flow has increased into my

hands and made them warm simply because my attention was maintained on that

part of my body, full stop. No need to use these quasi-mystical

concepts. Qi is right there in front of you, closer than that in fact.

 

These two ideas, of Qi as being embodied and of Qi as being feeling, may

seem contradictory at first, but if you think about the idea of the

universe being composed of consciousness (as Quantum physics tends to point

to, as has been espoused by spiritual traditions worldwide), this makes

more sense.

 

The following is not Kendall's idea, it is something I am playing with at

the moment. Maybe the meridians are less about the flow of some sort of

" Energy " field in the body, or being some sort of independent physical

structure, rather than it is the " flow of feeling " that happens in the

body, especially as we breathe, but is simply there due to the fact that we

are alive. Again, this feeling is quite subtle and most of us cannot detect

it, but the Qi of acupuncture begins and ends with this subjective

experience of feeling, that certainly depends on things like underlying

physiological structures and emanations of electromagnetic radiation, but

is actually a lot simpler and immediate than that.

 

To put it in slightly geekier terms, " Feel the Force " becomes just " Feel " ,

deeper and deeper, subtler and subtler, dropping away preconceptions and

attachments, rationalisations and doubts. Just feel.

 

This clearer understanding of Qi really opens things up. It allows us to

trust our senses more. It means that we can no longer get away with just

slapping a " I moved the Qi " label on an intervention and just stop there

with the inquiry of what happened exactly. Vitally, it also brings TCM and

acupuncture in particular more comprehensible and accessible to science.

 

I haven't gone so far into Kendall to hear what he has to say exactly about

Zheng Qi and oxygen, but I seriously doubt he is talking about Zheng Qi as

simply oxygen as some have warned me, he seems to be too intelligent to

make such a gross reduction.

 

Any comments/corrections?

 

Cheers,

 

 

 

http://www.centreofhealinghands.com

 

Work: 02 9787 4100

Mobile: 0403 103 807

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

>

> [lionel.y.chan]

>So what is the difference between the French " Qi " and the Chinese Qi? I

>will go through point form a comparison of key comparisons:

> * The Chinese know that Qi is everywhere and is everything, the French

>emphasise mostly that it is everywhere.

> * The Chinese Qi is much more encompassing of all manifestation in this

>world, energy and matter, whereas for the French it is mostly about energy.

> * The Chinese Qi is much more embodied, empirical and immanent. The

>French Qi is a bit more abstract, mysterious and mystical.

>This difference is small, yet it makes all the difference in the

>world. Generally when the typical TCM student imagines Qi, he imagines

>some sort of field of energy flowing like a force field or electricity

>through a wire travelling the meridians of the body. This is not

>necessarily a mistake, but for what it omits - the physical reality of what

>we see, and especially feel, right in front of us, is also Qi. This subtle

>energy I feel on my fingertips when I do Qigong is Qi certainly, but then

>this computer table and this chair I am working on is also Qi - it is both

>the subtle and the mundane.

[Jason]

Now if this is true (the field at the end of your fingers being qi) do you

not think that when doing acupuncture and dealing with the meridians this is

the most important thing.. meaning the gross desk qi (although

linguistically and culturally also correct) is not that relevant. I think

the big question in my mind has always been how does it apply to our

understanding of meridians and acupuncture and treatment. This energy idea

or field), to me, has always had extreme relevance in the clinic. Yes the

term may overlook other important aspect of the way the Chinese use the

word, but it does exemplify 1 major aspect when dealing with acupuncture, or

so it seems... Now - most Chinese could care less about this type of qi

sensation, and usually equate qi with some sensation of pain or a

physiological response from the body. (And this may be a TCM issue)

Although, in meridian therapy it seems that is all everyone talks about,

this subtle field, this energy, this qi that one subtlety feels...

 

NOW - D.K. - and others have stated that D.K. supports classical acupuncture and

actually has revived many people interest in this. I like to hear this..

The question I have to the experts in his hypothesis (or those that have

read it) - How does his model explain the subtleties that are so prevalent

in the classic texts. I.e. needle direction, needle tech, exactness of

locations. Furthermore how does it explain that h6 and h7 would have

different functions. This is what I have never seen to be explained. Some

might say that his theory grossly understates the potential of acupuncture

due to forcing it into a western model physiological model, although it does

explain some aspects.

 

D.K. says " Research so far shows that the true concepts of

operate under known physiological principles, involving the complex

organization of the neural, vascualar, endocrine, and somatic systems,

sustained by the circulation of nutrients, vital substances, and oxygen from

vital air. "

 

Now if research does not explain such subtleties, then we cannot say that

these are not relevant but more precisely that the science just is not at

the level of sophistication. (Unless there is research that has been done

to disprove such ideas, which I would like to see)...

 

 

>

>Let me try to explain it another way. When we needle a patient and try to

>elicit a De Qi sensation, we commonly make the mistake of saying that this

>undefined Qi moved, therefore the patient felt something physically

>happening in their body. This is not quite right. A better way to explain

>what the Chinese meant by Qi is to say that the patient felt something

>physically happen in their body, full stop. And that is Qi, because Qi is

>everything and everywhere, so of course everything that you feel is Qi

>moving.

[Jason]

I agree and think this is important... Yes physical occurrences are sensed

and this is definitely QI! But what about the 'qi' felt by the practitioner

and no physical sensation is felt by the patient, because really it is about

the practitioner's sensation anyway. Of course you can say everything is qi,

but that lack of specificity can lose meaning sometimes...

 

I like your ideas and agree with much, I am though just playing with the

other side a bit... I.e. We are as we all know electrical bodies with

electrical currents moving through us... Electricity by definition does

create a field. This field can be manipulated, this field is energy, and it

may be one way that acupuncture, especially non-insertion, works... But I

agree it is somewhat limited in the whole scope of things... Comments?

 

-

[Guest guest]

, " " <@c...>

wrote:

>

 

> Although, in meridian therapy it seems that is all everyone talks about,

> this subtle field, this energy, this qi that one subtlety feels...

>

 

 

I think Lionel's point with which I largely agree is that qi does not refer to

this field, per se.

But rather qi is the term used to describe one's perception of events that are

made up of

many variable, including oxygen, electrical fields, biochemicals, etc. That qi

is not

something separate from these things, but rather how the human mind " sees " these

events

from a macroscopic level. I don't think this diminishes the qi model at all.

It still allows

that by manipulating this trained perceptual ability, whether one is giving or

receiving the

treatment, one can influence health. In other words, if you train in detecting

the subtleties

of qi, you can use these perceptions to guide treatment. But this does not mean

that when

the needles are inserted, the actual physical effects are anything other than

those well

known to biology plus other variables like fields, information and complexity.

Qi can be a

useful concept wihtout being a discrete thing, force or energy. I have always

said qi is like

emotions. We know emotions are perceived by the person while in the blood many

characteristic changes are happening. One cannot perceive these microscopic

changes

directly, but the human cerebral cortex is capable of attaching higher order

insights to this

stew of biochemistry.

 

I don't think anyone would just claim anger is some form of electromagnetic

field separate

from known physiology. I think the same must be true for qi. the difference is

that that

most people must be trained to perceive qi. But it doesn't take much. Being

openminded,

being exposed to the concept and doing some very simple exercises works for most

people in the first hour of their first qi gong class. It does seem important

to some that

channel qi has some independent existence as energy. But it makes no difference

as far

as I can tell. A perceptual/cogntiive model of qi really allows and explains

the same felt

sensations as an " energetic " one. And it is not dogged by a label of

pseudoscience due to

a complete lack of any evidence that manipulation of supposed energy fields has

anything

to do with acupuncture effects.

 

It is this admitted felt sensation plus this utter lack of evidence to suggest

any discrete

force underlying that lends more support to the idea that this is a percetual

phenomena.

This idea that Jason has presented has been around since the dawn of

electromagnetic era

in the late 1800s. Hundreds of experiments done in those days and in Russia

during the

communist era and in China during the maoist era have failed to present any

convincing

proof of the primary importance of electromagnetism in biological function. It

clearly

plays some role, but I suspect it is mainly related to the physical orientation

of the internal

organs and the orientation of the organism in space. but I most certainly do

not believe

that electromagenetic fields are the primary determinants of most functions

attributed to

qi, such as warming, protecting and transforming.

 

[Guest guest]

This is my big question as well. How does he explain the different

functions of points/holes, and their associations with internal

viscera, or the influence of the factors mentioned below?

 

 

On Sep 23, 2004, at 6:23 AM, wrote:

 

> How does his model explain the subtleties that are so prevalent

> in the classic texts. I.e. needle direction, needle tech, exactness of

> locations. Furthermore how does it explain that h6 and h7 would have

> different functions.

[Guest guest]

>

>

>

>It is this admitted felt sensation plus this utter lack of evidence to

>suggest any discrete

>force underlying that lends more support to the idea that this is a

>percetual phenomena.

>This idea that Jason has presented has been around since the dawn of

>electromagnetic era

>in the late 1800s. Hundreds of experiments done in those days and in

>Russia during the

>communist era and in China during the maoist era have failed to present any

>convincing

>proof of the primary importance of electromagnetism in biological function.

 

 

[Jason]

I think this is grossly wrong... There is tons of research that shows that

EM influencing biological FX. We are in essence electrical... Acu example;

Do you not think that e-stim units can affect us biologically? I surely

must be misunderstanding you here... Alon would you like to comment (his

upcoming book goes into quite detail discussing this, with much research,

although it is not from china or Russia from the 1800's, but from modern

western authors...) Maybe your whole statement rests on the word 'primary'

- and I don't know how one quantifies such a biological system and its

influences, but it is quite clear that EM effects the body is quite profound

ways on many biological levels.

 

 

>It clearly

>plays some role, but I suspect it is mainly related to the physical

>orientation of the internal

>organs and the orientation of the organism in space. but I most certainly

>do not believe

>that electromagenetic fields are the primary determinants of most functions

>attributed to

>qi, such as warming, protecting and transforming.

[Jason]

This is not what anyone is suggesting... (at least I don't think so) - Those

such functions are a different qi animal... The question is really how does

the practitioner with needles or not affect the patient... Through what

means? And what does the practitioner feel when they say they feel the qi.

This felt qi is a tangible experience and in some situations it feels an

actual field with force. The P is able to manipulate this qi and make

biological changes in the body. He may use his/her qi (qi gong) - he may

use electric acupuncture, or a magnet. All in my view are EM.

I think all deep physiological needling be admonished from discussion and

really concentrate on what is going on when someone does non-insertion

needling or qigong - Because really this is in essence a very qi experience

(separate from direct physiological responses). As stated before, the pure

physiological model does not account for the subtitles that are inherit in

many acupuncture systems, including classical ones. And we should remind

ourselves that at the time of the neijing it was not just deep needling, but

there is mentions of such a 'energetic' subtle style. So to date the only

system (from the west) that actually describes some of these phenomenon (to

me) is the electromagnetic model. But I am open to other opinions.

 

-

[Guest guest]

Further consideration:

 

Maybe the EM model is not the primarily biological influence of the body

(whatever that may mean)... But fine... This would, though, help explain the

subtle that we experience with acupuncture. We all know that acupuncture is

compared to western medicine or more gross styles of therapy relatively

subtle... Many times the patient does not feel anything except some

relations. IF EM is a subtle communication mechanism in the model, then

tapping into this with acupuncture (or qigong) would not elicit subtle msg.

that overtime drastic responses, but instead sending a new msg. through the

system. A msg. that might get totally squashed by previous conditioning or

noise, but none the less, can make substantial biological changes overtime

with repeated treatments. Many of the EM research is with higher powered

equipment, in our avg. acu clinic we have a human body, a needle and

sometimes an e-stim. All that I know is there something that connects

people, thoughts, wave, qi, fields, or energy.. IT is all makes sense to me,

and whatever it is, it is subtle and may not be detected fully by WM... IS

that so unreasonable (that WM lacks the sophistication?)

 

-

[Guest guest]

Alon would you like to comment (his

upcoming book goes into quite detail discussing this, with much research,

although it is not from china or Russia from the 1800's, but from modern

western authors...)

>>>>Much of this is more about language than anything else. Really what is Qi,

what is energy?

Alon