Qi, again, (was Acupuncture May Aid Cancer)

[Guest guest]

Fernando,

 

> I agree that members of our profession need to employ terminology

in

> our language that properly represents the meaning of qi.

Particularly,

> when used in literature written by those within our field.

 

If I were to identify a time at which it

seems to me most critical that we use

the word correctly it's when we are

thinking about it in our most inarticulate

thoughts. Somewhere in Prof. Cheng's writings

or in notes from one of his lectures, he

mentioned the change that his pracitce of

tai4 ji2 had on his writing. As I recall

his comment, he said that at a certain

point, his use of words became much

clearer, as he refined his qi4.

 

 

>

> In regards to the media in general, I wonder, whether explaining

the

> meaning of qi to a reporter, from the various perspectives that

have

> been discussed on this list on the last couple of months such as

> information theory, would have any meaningful value to someone who

is

> writing for a target population whose reading skills are of an

> eighth-grade level? What is the reading level for most major

> newspapers in the States? If I recall correctly, one of the highest

> level, the New York Times, is 11-12 grade reading skill.

 

Come to think of it, 8th graders are pretty

darn intelligent and media savy, certainly.

As I've said a few times now, I think that

we have to keep the emphasis on the only

place it belongs, namely our own minds.

The process of rectifying the names is

not only a group dynamic. It is a personal

practice, as described in Da Xue. Ezra Pound

pointed out that it provides a metaphysics

that scholars once assumed missing from

Confucian thought, mistakenly viewing it

as nothing but an elaborate series of

iterations of social status and the

agreements that exist and bind them all

together. If we encourage and help one

another to come to terms with the integral

meanings of qi4 and the other basic terms

and concepts of the subject, then the

whole tenor of our speaking and writing

will change...because our thinking will

clarify. Of course, we also have to

cultivate and refine the qi4.

 

 

>

> How would you explain qi to a reporter so that when his/her article

is

> printed, readers won't have to put on their thinking cap?

 

Why on earth would you not want readers to

put on their thinking caps? Even 8th graders

can be challenged. Even reporters can be

challenged. We've got to get over the notion

that we are the victims of our environment

and the various non-optimum conditions that

we can identify that exist in it. We are not

limited by the limitations of others. These

people to whom we so broadly refer when we

talk about the media and public communications

are our patients. And the superior doctor

treats patients before they get sick.

 

It begins with speaking matters clearly

and straightforwardly. No one has to listen.

But anyone who chooses to listen is entitled

to hear accurate and reliable information.

The whole brief advancing literacy in Chinese

medical language and literature is to help

ensure the capacity of students and practitioners

to provide sound information to each other,

to their patients, and to the general public

via the media from time to time.

 

 

> As someone stated on an earlier post " we still see through a glass

> darkly " . Todd's recent question regarding the meaning of qi among

> qi-gong masters, shows that he continues to search for clearer

meaning

> of the word qi; and he's not alone. Can it be explained with two

> words, or even three or four? Is Pneuma wind or spirit? is Prana

> energy or breath? Is qi....?

 

Well, you know, we wrote a whole book about it.

I see the path through the territory you're

describing here as one we all must travel

together. We wrote the book for the express

purpose of provoking discussions such as

this one. We realized that in order for

the community to come up with a broader,

deeper, and more comprehensive definition

of this all-important term, there is going

to have to take place a series of such

discussions. From time to time, certainly,

people in the media get interested for

various reasons. Largely, these are the

same reasons they get interested in anything

else: money, conflict, controversy, death,

sex, and so on. Just open up any newspaper

or turn on the TV.

 

I believe that we should just engage such

media people in the discussion such as it

actually is. The truth, I find, plays far

better as a general rule than made up stuff.

 

Even an 8th grader can pretty much tell

what's real in the media...most of the

time.

 

Ken