But people are only driven to the type of irrational acts of war, with the addition of a commanding ideology. — AmadeusD

How about they enter war because of a lack of principles and moral thinking? The child interprets "Thou shalt not kill". to mean what it says. The full-grown Christian rationalizes the word should be "murder" because there are times when killing is a good thing. Or we can go the other way- sure we can crush little countries and then rob them of their resources to cover the cost of the war, but in the long run this can escalate war around the world and severely damage our relationship with the world increasing the need to have a bigger more expensive military force. Moral thinking does not stop at defining and accomplishing goals, it considers cause and effect long into the future. It is sad the media left us ignorant of the neo-cons who wanted military control of the Middle East and what Bush and Cheney had to do with the neo-cons and the invasion of Iraq long before 911. What was the ideology that made that invasion okay?

What was the ideology that made that invasion okay? — Athena

Imperialism.

How about they enter war because of a lack of principles and moral thinking? — Athena

Due to a commanding ideology replacing those faculties... They are thinking morally, but not your moral system. Its teleogical divine command theory.

I'm really unsure where this response has anything at all to do with what i'm trying to get across.

Yes.....quite right. Unsure what the implication for our exchange is here. My points essentially rest on this. — AmadeusD

I am not pleased by my failure to put all my thoughts into linear form and clarify what one thought has to do with another, but if we have an agreement about the contrast between Christian thinking and the Enlightenment, maybe things can start making more sense. Those are two totally different understandings of reality. Understanding that difference is understanding it extends to a moral reasoning difference. Empirical thinking is good for moral judgment. I am not sure how good religious moral thinking is.

Here is a thought I don't know how to get into the discussion. European countries were almost constantly in a war. Like thinking a God has favorite people and will protect them in war while He weakens the enemy, maybe problematic thinking? Believing when people win a duel or a war, that proves God favors them, might be problematic thinking?

The whole belief system may be problematic and empirical thinking might result in better morality? What is the good?

Oh yes, self-determination! I think we are giving each other and our young much more space for self-determination and here I cringe and turn around. When I hear of young people killing themselves and the role the internet plays in this, I think we need to limit self-determination and at least do more to protect our children. But I see this as next to impossible because we don't have shares values and agreements. Our morality is not keeping pace with technology.

I would love to share a good drink and continue this discussion but it is time for me to run. I promise I will keep thinking and return. What might we instill in our children before we set them free with self-determination?

teleogical divine command theory. — AmadeusD

I had to look up "teleological divine command theory". Like I knew that thinking has been behind the more aggressive military behavior of the US. Bill Graham did such a great Christmas about how God wants us to send our sons and daughters to fight in Iraq that I almost enlisted myself and I am strongly opposed to that military action and Christianity. But I didn't know this is a defined theory. Reading a name for it and the explanation still is shocking to me. How horrifying that humans can think a God wants them to fight wars, so they engage in war.

Come on you are very knowledgeable what do you think of the Greek and Roman gods of war? I love that the men of Athens did not believe Alexander the Great was the son of a god but they said, "If he wants to be a god, let him be a god". Of all the stupid things to believe, in this day and age. Believing it is a god of war we should follow is a bit horrifying isn't it? :scream:

Okay, and we are back to the great controversy. No man can win a war alone, but if they are charismatic the people are superstitious enough to believe their leader is a god or chosen by God, this leader can lead his people to war and win. It has gotten my attention that men who have been called Great are men of war. Why is that! How can we believe such a person is a god or chosen by God, in this day and age?

We were anti-imperialistic. That is a real choice and democratic principles are anti-imperialistic. For a long time, I have thought Christianity was the cause of our warring history. Believing we do terrible things because it is our evil nature instead of believing a false belief is the problem, distresses me a lot! What do you think?

By it being entirely separated from Western Thought from about 1100AD. By religious warfare, ironically.
We stole from Arab scholars, for sure, but that doesn't mean our thought are intertwined systems. We nicked sources and ran away with them. Islam stayed put, and is still there today, for the most part. Developing algebra isn't relevant to what we're discussing here. — AmadeusD

Oh, oh I love your statement BUT algebra, or math in general, is relevant to this discussion. Man, I need a better emoticon . See me excitingly jumping up and down and screaming what math has to do with everything I say about democracy and morals.

Empirical thinking, give me proof. Math is at the foundation of empirical thinking and proofs. This is what separated the Greeks from the rest of the world and replaced the gods with logos, reason, the controlling force of the universe. It is all about math, the whole universe, and everything we do. Just because people don't know, does not mean it is not so.

Please bear with me and give math some thought. This link to math quotes may help you realize what math has to do with everything we value and its connection with morals being a matter of cause and effect and also the very reason some believed democracy, rule by the people, is possible and even superior to a God-appointed king. https://www.prodigygame.com/main-en/blog/math-quotes/

Bill Graham did such a great Christmas about how God wants us to send our sons and daughters to fight in Iraq that I almost enlisted myself and I am strongly opposed to that military action and Christianity. — Athena

Interesting.

How horrifying that humans can think a God wants them to fight wars, so they engage in war. — Athena

It doesn't really shock me. Consider: If any of those theories are true, ignoring them is the highest possible level of failure in life. That potential failure scares a lot of people into action. Best i can tell, large amounts of religious conversion (i include childhood indoctrination here) is scare-tactic.

Believing it is a god of war we should follow is a bit horrifying isn't it? — Athena

I would be horrified if it weren't so normalised :grimace: . It also seems to not quite require the intensity i outlined above. It seems that just some charismatic guy can have the same effort on people I would consider perhaps slightly of weaker mind (than what, i'm unsure.. It just can't find a better phrase).

No man can win a war alone, but if they are charismatic the people are superstitious enough to believe their leader is a god or chosen by God, this leader can lead his people to war and win. — Athena

Bingo. And fear of failure, and the comfort of a leader who is 'sure to win' is extremely attractive, I think.

Believing we do terrible things because it is our evil nature instead of believing a false belief is the problem, distresses me a lot! What do you think? — Athena

Well, I think it's going to be a mixture of many, many, many things. A somewhat uneducated population being charmed by a very aggressive but eloquent leader may result in society-wide acts you'd consider Evil, but it's hard to consider those people evil.
In war, though, it's hard not to think they're evil. Im unsure why. That said, though, I do think a 'false belief', though not necessarily cosmic, is probably the reason for almost all purposefully-harmful behaviour (i.e not contingently, or accidentally harmful).

algebra, or math in general, is relevant to this discussion. — Athena

I vehemently disagree.

Math is at the foundation of empirical thinking and proofs. — Athena

Imo, false. Math is at the basis of mathematical proofs. Empirical proofs come from observation alone. That seems to be within the definitions. Feel free to parse out what you're meaning here...

It is all about math, the whole universe, and everything we do. Just because people don't know, does not mean it is not so. — Athena

That you see it so, doesn't make it so either :snicker: I am just reaching the end of The Critique of Pure Reason and so these things are very much in my thought right now so perhaps im unusually resistant.

I screwed up and lost a couple of hours of arguments about reason and morality and I really don't have time right now to do all that again. Until we have a argreement on what math has to do with proofs and empirical thinking, continuing may be futile so I don't mind losing all my work and starting over again. Your last argument seems the most important, so I will focus on that. I really look forward to continuing but getting my paperwork done has to be my priority or I won't get paid.

Did you read the math quotes?

Just so.

I am already aware of the vast majority of those quotes. I'm really quite unsure what you wanted me to gain from them, other than that mathematicians can sometimes be poetical.

As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.
— Albert Einstein

This one seems to support my notion :P

Okay . I don't agree with you but I don't have time to argue this morning. I think math is the language of God and there is not rock evidence of that, so it is more of a poetical notion. I am not sure Pythagorus should get credit for the proof of a triangle, but a math book I once read said Egyptians were well aware of triangles but did not have a concept of a proof making the notion of a triangle universal. I think the difference here is the concrete triangle and the abstract triangle. Which is more real, the many imperfect triangles or the prefect one- Plato.

In my fuzzy mind is a notion that the drive to find proofs is a sharp contrast with mythological explanations and that this difference is what separate the Athenians from the rest of the world. We see that difference coming up in math and medicine. Not that the rest of the world did not have medicine but their approach to it was different. The Chinese notion of chi has proven very useful but it is not at all like believing our health depends on our fluids.

The bigger issue being one of how we think and that is important to our understanding of morals as a matter of cause and effect, or a mythological notion of morals. I am good because a god told us this is the way to behave, and how to treat our slaves. Verses, if I don't get this right, things will go wrong. And it is "if I don't get things right, things will go wrong, that is vital to morals and democracy.

The link you gave us is great. I have listened to his explanations before and I highly respect this ideas.

Ouch, I am out of time. :cry: but I have to say, the explanation of the importance of education and voting is great.

Okay . I don't agree with you but I don't have time to argue this morning. I think math is the language of God and there is not rock evidence of that, so it is more of a poetical notion. — Athena

Fair enough. I find the concept of God incoherent, so I guess that explains the daylight between us there :P

Egyptians were well aware of triangles but did not have a concept of a proof making the notion of a triangle universal — Athena

As i understand it, this is true for many pre-Pythagorean cultures. Though, it's worth noting it seems like Pythagoras' school may have been the source of 'his' insights, rather than the man himself.

The Chinese notion of chi has proven very useful — Athena

For? Not an indictment - Just wondering where you see the utility. Given it's almost entirely absent from both psychological and physical medicine I'm hoping for a neat story about its import :)

The link you gave us is great. — Athena

Which link, sorry? Hope that doesn't come acorss totally aloof lol

It is such a pleasure to converse with you that I regreet not having more time.

Thanks for giving a pass on my use of the word, God. I think some theoretical thinkers have argued God is beyond our comprehension. The religious rule that Christians love to break but Muslims firmly adhere to, is we are not to make an image of God. We are not to think of a god as a being, like Zeus but obviously, that is what Christians do and by deifying Jesus they have a very personal God that meets a human need to be loved, cared for, and protected.

How about if we think of god as beyond our comprehension instead of a person with supernatural powers? That might clean up a lot of religious problems. When I say math is the language of God, I am poking at the notion that a personal god spoke with his favorite people and not everyone else. And I also mean we should not be too sure of what we think we know. However, if we can say it with math then we might pay attention and explore what the math tells us. We must stay awake to learn the logos, the reason why things are as they are and can we change this or not.

For sure Pythagoras's school was a source of discovered knowledge! Professors learn a lot from their students. Keep in mind, mathematically, the question is more important than the solution. With the right question, we open the door to discovery and the answer closes it. You are a pleasure because you make me think about what I think and because you do so without putting me on the defensive, I am free to think about what I think and can change it without feeling ashamed for being wrong before I knew more.

The best proof of chi is acupuncture. The American Medical Association refused to accept acupuncture because even though they witnessed that it works, a person can have surgery without pain when acupuncture is used, but they did not know why. Remember the question is the most important thing. With the question of why acupuncture works,a second system of pain messages was discovered and with that chi was proven. Here is an explanation of chi.



Keeping in mind the most important part of thinking is the question, and you want the fun of watching a demonstration of chi here is the link I found https://www.google.com/search?q=demonstration+of+chi+in+martial+arts&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS926US926&oq=demonstration+of+chi+in+marcial&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUqCQgBECEYChigATIGCAAQRRg5MgkIARAhGAoYoAEyCQgCECEYChigAdIBCjIxMDgwajBqMTWoAgCwAgA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

I think I goofed. I looked back and didn't see the post I was talking about so it could been a discussion in a different forum. I will check that forum. Found it. This comedian is worth our attention.
https://politicalorphanage.libsyn.com/

How about if we think of god as beyond our comprehension instead of a person with supernatural powers? — Athena

I understand what you're getting at, but that category is far too broad to have a name. What aspect of 'beyond our comprehension' are you pointing to? Anything beyond our comprehension? Seems a bit of a McGuffin.

We must stay awake to learn the logos, the reason why things are as they are and can we change this or not — Athena

Isn't this the entire thrust of philosophical thinking? What's the special occasion in this case?

You are a pleasure because you make me think about what I think and because you do so without putting me on the defensive — Athena

I am very glad to hear that - I feel the same. Being wrong is really helpful for me, too!

Remember the question is the most important thing. With the question of why acupuncture works,a second system of pain messages was discovered and with that chi was proven. Here is an explanation of chi. — Athena

I truly, seriously do not think there is anything to support this position.

Could you please present me with unbiased, peer-reviewed work that shows that 'chi' is real? Having been ensconsed in new-age groups and thinking for a decade or more, I did look into Qi very deeply because i 'bought' it at the time. It seems to me there is literally nothing, anywhere at all, that can be trusted to legitimate that concept. Would be very much open to something which shows - without ideological investment - something reaosnable about it. While I'm, not ale to run the video right now (at work) from what I know of him, Jesse Enkamp is a typical McDojo internet talking head with very little in the way of sensible takes. Have run in to him/his work around Jiu Jitsu many times over the last few years and its routinely been shown as nonsense designed to make money.

If not, my bad.

I think great leaders ride on a wave that is created by the circumstances of the moment. I think we should be paying more attention to the masses and what is driving them. Why are so many clinging to a tribe, instead of their own comprehension of the good? — Athena

Did you know Tolstoi and Dostoyevsky had an entire discussion about whether great men were great or simply people at the right time at the right moment? This resulted in War & Peace and Crime & Punishment.

I'm a historie totale guy myself (camp Tolstoi).

:up:

The only problem with Dostoevsky is that the characters in his major works are always in the wrong place at the wrong moment. :lol:

deleted it because I didn't mean to post it.

I understand what you're getting at, but that category is far too broad to have a name. What aspect of 'beyond our comprehension' are you pointing to? Anything beyond our comprehension? Seems a bit of a McGuffin. — AmadeusD

That is perfect. Isn't there an argument for not having a name for the God of Abraham? The word "god" is generic, isn't it? The idea that God is beyond our comprehension is not mine. I think the God of Abraham religions deal with the problem of creating a god in our own image. The problem is a personal god meets our human needs better than a force that is not made in our image.

[/quote]We must stay awake to learn the logos, the reason why things are as they are and can we change this or not
— Athena

Isn't this the entire thrust of philosophical thinking? What's the special occasion in this case? [/quote]

:up: Absolutely, this is the thrust of philosophical thinking and why I keep mentioning logos, reason, the controlling force of the universe. There are no temples built to logos, but the pagan temples were places of learning. Math was important to our ability to grasp reality in these pagan temples that were destroyed by Christians. Unfortunately, that is not common knowledge.

I truly, seriously do not think there is anything to support this position.

Could you please present me with unbiased, peer-reviewed work that shows that 'chi' is real? Having been ensconced in new-age groups and thinking for a decade or more, I did look into Qi very deeply because i 'bought' it at the time. It seems to me there is literally nothing, anywhere at all, that can be trusted to legitimate that concept. Would be very much open to something which shows - without ideological investment - something reasonable about it. While I'm, not able to run the video right now (at work) from what I know of him, Jesse Enkamp is a typical McDojo internet talking head with very little in the way of sensible takes. Have run in to him/his work around Jiu Jitsu many times over the last few years and its routinely been shown as nonsense designed to make money.

Okay, chi is just another word for energy, and that most certainly is worth arguing about. I think especially in the West ever since Rome and the fall of Athens, we totally fail to have a good concepts of energy. And from here I want to leap into Aztec explanations of energy and Michael S. Schneider's explanation of math. Not because I understand these points of view, but because I don't and some good arguments might resolve that problem.

Along with what is chi, what is harmonic resonance, rhythm, and organic balance? Math helps us understand such things, and then we get logos an understanding of cause and effect. Do I know what I am talking about? Heck no. I am embarrassingly ignorant but grade schools never opened my mind to such knowledge, and when I got to college, the only education my father wanted me to have was home economics. It was his son who was encouraged to study engineering. But I love Einstien's comment about how important imagination is. I read of these things I do not understand and I get as excited as a child full of wonderment.

The American Medical Association accepts acupuncture as a legitimate medical practice. Science has proven it is a second path of energy that is expressed in pain.

Traditional Chinese medicine explains acupuncture as a technique for balancing the flow of energy or life force — known as chi or qi (chee) — believed to flow through pathways (meridians) in your body. — Mayoclinic

What is meridians?

a circle of constant longitude passing through a given place on the earth's surface and the terrestrial poles.
"the European Broadcasting Area extends from the Atlantic to the meridian 40°E"
2.
(in acupuncture and Chinese medicine) each of a set of pathways in the body along which vital energy is said to flow. There are twelve such pathways associated with specific organs.
"the slow movements and postures of t'ai chi open up and align the meridians of the body" — Oxford languages

There is a lot to think about. Do you want to go there?

Did you know Tolstoi and Dostoyevsky had an entire discussion about whether great men were great or simply people at the right time at the right moment? This resulted in War & Peace and Crime & Punishment.

I'm a historie totale guy myself (camp Tolstoi). — Benkei

No, I did not know that and I do not care. Threads are great in the beginning and then they wander all over the place and die. People stop posting and the thread disappears in the past. Bringing it back from the past does not return it to the vitality it had.

Threads are fun as long as we are participating. Old threads are already done and those who were interested have lost interest in the thread. What fun is it to add something to an old thread?

The only problem with Dostoevsky is that the characters in his major works are always in the wrong place at the wrong moment. — javi2541997

That doesn't sound like fun. But it is an interesting approach to writing a story. Making the circumstances the protagonist instead of a person. I like that idea very much.

Hey :) Thanks for coming back!

That is perfect. Isn't there an argument for not having a name for the God of Abraham? The word "god" is generic, isn't it? The idea that God is beyond our comprehension is not mine. I think the God of Abraham religions deal with the problem of creating a god in our own image. The problem is a personal god meets our human needs better than a force that is not made in our image. — Athena

The Tetragrammaton. YHWH. Definitely discussions/disagreements around that particular thing - but it doesn't touch what i'm trying to ask. How could you conceptulise something beyond comprehension? If that's the definition of a God, it's necessarily useless.

Absolutely agreed, on the reason for that, though. I think the conceptions of God used throughout religions are necessarily formulaic in that they must meet some image parity, or else be redundant for the above reason.

logos, reason, the controlling force of the universe. — Athena

I don't know how these three are related, other than in a bit of esoteric thinking. What's the controlling force of the Universe in your view? Reason?

Okay, chi isjust another word for energy — Athena

(to the underlined): To my understanding, it is clear that: absolutely not. Qi is conceptualised as a substance which makes up the practical notion of the body in TCM, and functions in supernatural ways. It's understood as a basic, all-defining mechanism of the body which can cause or cure disease, allows for motion, and is the psychologically-motivating life-force in humans. It is definitely not analogous with Western (or even Middle Eastern) concepts of energy. I think it is very misleading to assess it as 'just another word for energy". It is closer to a wide-ranging use of hte Western term 'consciousness' with less strict limitations in action.

Not because I understand these points of view, but because I don't and some good arguments might resolve that problem. — Athena

I would suggest that if you don't understand a point of view, no argument will be truly relevant - but it can be a lot of fun!

Along with what is chi, what is harmonic resonance, rhythm, and organic balance? Math helps us understand such things, and then we get logos an understanding of cause and effect. — Athena

I don't think these are coherent leaps in discussion. I'm unsure how any of the following three items relate enough to Qi to be relevant as "Along with..".
Are you speaking about Logos as the Christian notion, or some other concept? In the former light, it seems a little weird to speak about in conjunction with Eastern, supernatural concepts.

the only education my father wanted me to have was home economics — Athena

Absolute bollocks, and I'm sorry that was the case.

Do you want to go there? — Athena

Sure. The quotes don't support your contention. Those quotes shows that the AMA accepts that TMC practictioners merely believe that those things are the case (i.e that Qi exists, acupuncture deals in it, etc..). The claims are all hedged in the language of the claim, and nothing there suggests the MA thinks Acupucture, or meridians, are legitimate medical practices. Even integrative health doesn't take it.. that.. seriously:
https://www.nccih.nih.gov/health/acupuncture-what-you-need-to-know#:~:text=There%20is%20evidence%20that%20acupuncture,shown%20to%20improve%20lung%20function.

Reducing pain can be physically understood as an externality of the practice, unrelated to the spiritual aspect supposed to be inherent in acupuncture (from a TCM perspective). Just as aligning hte spine can be nice and very helpful for eg Athletes, it wont cure a disease (the analogy being chiropractic).

The Tetragrammaton. YHWH. Definitely discussions/disagreements around that particular thing - but it doesn't touch what i'm trying to ask. How could you conceptulise something beyond comprehension? If that's the definition of a God, it's necessarily useless. — AmadeusD

It is fascinating to me how our minds grab onto something and that something becomes essential to our thinking, while millions of other possible thoughts have no effect on us. Long ago I read an old book about logic and I was grabbed by the thought we can never know enough to be totally sure of what we think we know. No matter how strongly we believe our thought is the correct one, we must always hold open the possibility that we could be wrong. For me, that is a God beyond comprehension. There is nothing about a god that makes this so, but it is about the limits of our minds. Our minds are not capable of knowing all that could be known. The purpose is to keep ourselves humble and preferably out of holy wars.

Absolutely agreed, on the reason for that, though. I think the conceptions of God used throughout religions are necessarily formulaic in that they must meet some image parity, or else be redundant for the above reason.

I take issue with ideas/definitions of God, because the God of Abraham is so different from any other notion of a god. To me it is pretty obvious, as we name new physics particles, the ancients named new gods when they became aware of a useful concept. Each god represents a limited concept. That far different from one god associated with demons and miracles. When the ancients had many gods, they could argue with each other and develop the consciousness of all things. Where can you go with one god? One god giving people rules leaves our consciousness undeveloped. The God of Abraham thinking annoys me so badly because it makes people so narrow-minded. Even when they do not believe in the reality of that God, the religion is so powerful, that any mention of God is assumed to be a god just like the God of Abraham. That notion of God has closed people's minds to anything else.

"logos, reason, the controlling force of the universe.
— Athena"

I don't know how these three are related, other than in a bit of esoteric thinking. What's the controlling force of the Universe in your view? Reason?

I do not know enough about physics to answer your question. Somehow there was an energy and that energy became manifest. This is the kind of thinking that goes with understanding the controlling force of the universe...

What were the first gasses in the universe?
These were mainly helium and hydrogen, which are still by far the most abundant elements in the universe.

The early universe | CERN — Wikipedia

How did those gasses lead to the manifest universe? The laws of physics are the controlling force. This law regarding gasses is the reason for gas being as it is.

What was the first gas law?
Boyle's Law - Definition, Equation, & Facts with Examples
Boyle's law is a gas law given by the Anglo-Irish chemist Robert Boyle in 1662. He stated that the pressure exerted by a gas is inversely proportional to the volume occupied by it at a constant mass and temperature. — Wikipedia

All of that is logos, reason, the controlling force of the universe and because our minds can discover the way of logos, we can be as the gods and because we can be as the gods, we can have democracy that is rule by reason, not rule by an absolute god or God chosen authority over the people. This belief system is not compatible with Christianity.

"Okay, chi is just another word for energy
— Athena"

(to the underlined): To my understanding, it is clear that: absolutely not. Qi is conceptualised as a substance which makes up the practical notion of the body in TCM, and functions in supernatural ways. It's understood as a basic, all-defining mechanism of the body which can cause or cure disease, allows for motion, and is the psychologically-motivating life-force in humans. It is definitely not analogous with Western (or even Middle Eastern) concepts of energy. I think it is very misleading to assess it as 'just another word for energy". It is closer to a wide-ranging use of the Western term 'consciousness' with less strict limitations in action.

:lol: Please let me share my merriment with you. I laughed because your comment tickled me. What is supernatural about chi? Is electricity conscious? How about the energy that moves clouds? What of the energy that makes our hearts beat? Is there consciousness with all forms of energy?

Here is a statement about chi.

Electricity is required for your nervous system to send signals throughout your body and to your brain, making it possible for you to move, feel, and think. — Irving Yee

When speaking of energy, it might help to have an understanding of mitochondria. Mitochondria is its own organism and they are essential to our lives.

These energy slaves are the mitochondria, and there are hundreds or even thousands of them inside every one of your cells (with the exception of red blood cells) and in every other human alive. They still resemble their bacterial origin in appearance, but we can no longer exist without them, nor they without us. — Dr Steven Zuryn

There is connection with mitochondria and our breath that is also related to chi.

The classic role of mitochondria is oxidative phosphorylation, which generates ATP by utilizing the energy released during the oxidation of the food we eat. ATP is used in turn as the primary energy source for most biochemical and physiological processes, such as growth, movement and homeostasis. We turn over approximately our own body weight in ATP each day, and almost all of this is generated by mitochondria, primarily within muscle, brain, liver, heart and gastrointestinal tract.5 The pre-eminent role of eating is to provide the fuel for mitochondria, and the pre-eminent role of breathing is to provide the oxygen and to remove the carbon dioxide produced during oxidative phosphorylation by mitochondria. Similarly, a major role of the cardiovascular system is to deliver the substrates (glucose, fatty acids, oxygen) and remove the products (carbon dioxide) of mitochondrial activity. — Br J Dermatol.

I am separating your comments so the thoughts aren't so complicated they are useless.

Not because I understand these points of view, but because I don't and some good arguments might resolve that problem.
— Athena

I would suggest that if you don't understand a point of view, no argument will be truly relevant - but it can be a lot of fun! — AmadeusD

Yes, fun! :grin:

Along with what is chi, what is harmonic resonance, rhythm, and organic balance? Math helps us understand such things, and then we get logos an understanding of cause and effect.
— Athena

I don't think these are coherent leaps in discussion. I'm unsure how any of the following three items relate enough to Qi to be relevant

The object is to understand energy and all 3 words are about energy. If our heart is out of rhythm, we are in deep trouble. Agree? What keeps our heart in rhythm? Damn, asking Google what keeps our heart in rhythm gets links to drugs, not an explanation of how nature works, but here is a related answer...

Listening to music may boost exercise ability, ease stress and anxiety, and enhance recovery from strokes. — Harvard

Some people may think that is a spiritual explanation. Now the problem is, how do we understand spirit. Does that mean angels and demons, or our mood, we are high-spirited or low-spirited, happy or sad?

Music can heal and that is about harmony, rhythm, and resonance. Can you now see these things as related to music and healing? My thinking is influenced by Jose Arguelles's explanation of Pulsation-rays explained in his book The Mayan Factor, Path Beyond Technology. That book is totally rejected by the science community and that is understandable, but I think we have something to gain by considering these different expressions of energy.

Are you speaking about Logos as the Christian notion, or some other concept? In the former light, it seems a little weird to speak about in conjunction with Eastern, supernatural concepts.

Logos is a Greek concept, along with the notion of a God having 3 aspects, making the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost one god, not 3 gods. Christianity is Hellenized Judaism. The concept of logos is Greek, not Hebrew.

The only education my father wanted me to have was home economics
— Athena

Absolute bollocks, and I'm sorry that was the case.

I am not totally opposed to women putting family first because so much good can come out of that, but both the man and woman need to agree what is best for the family. I assumed way too much and made a bad choice. But I want to defend the good of a man supporting the family financially while the woman supports the family emotionally and socially in many very important ways. Especially today when we live so long and can do both raise a family and have a career. My plan was to return to college, get a degree, and then have a career but I didn't begin my marriage with a discussion of such things. As I said, I assumed too much.

Do you want to go there?
— Athena

Sure. The quotes don't support your contention. Those quotes shows that the AMA accepts that TMC practictioners merely believe that those things are the case (i.e that Qi exists, acupuncture deals in it, etc..). The claims are all hedged in the language of the claim, and nothing there suggests the AMA thinks Acupucture, or meridians, are legitimate medical practices. Even integrative health doesn't take it.. that.. seriously:
https://www.nccih.nih.gov/health/acupuncture-what-you-need-to-know#:~:text=There%20is%20evidence%20that%20acupuncture,shown%20to%20improve%20lung%20function.

I am confused. You say the quotes don't support the benefit of acupuncture and then post a link that does. "In addition to pain conditions, acupuncture has also been studied for at least 50 other health problems. There is evidence that acupuncture may help relieve seasonal allergy symptoms, stress incontinence in women, and nausea and vomiting associated with cancer treatment. It may also help relieve symptoms and improve the quality of life in people with asthma, but it has not been shown to improve lung function."

I will add this to what your link ....

What is the success rate of acupuncture to quit smoking?
According to Ballal et al.,14 performing smoking cessation acupuncture for six weeks produced a smoking cessation rate of 50.1%, 45.5% of the subjects reduced their consumption to 5 cigarettes and 4.3% failed to reduce smoking.
The Effects of the Acupuncture Treatment for Smoking Cessation in ... — Yonsei Med J.

Something is happening and because this is proven insurance now pays for acupuncture treatments.

Reducing pain can be physically understood as an externality of the practice, unrelated to the spiritual aspect supposed to be inherent in acupuncture (from a TCM perspective). Just as aligning the spine can be nice and very helpful for eg Athletes, it wont cure a disease (the analogy being chiropractic).

I do not understand why you speak of "the spiritual aspect"? What do you mean by spiritual? Is this in line with believing in angels and demons? There seems to be a gap between my consideration of energy and your consideration of the spiritual realm. Whatever, I have spent half the day reading your post and looking for better explanations and it has been fun. :grin: This is a whole lot better than talking with neighbors about the current gossip. Thank the powers that be for the internet and stimulating discussions.

Our minds are not capable of knowing all that could be known — Athena

Then what is capable of knowing things our minds are not able to know? It seems to me this is a bit backwards - If we can't know it, how can it be knowable?

For me, that is a God beyond comprehension. — Athena

I just can't understand why you're invoking 'God' as a gap-filler in your knowledge. It seems to illustrate the very basic misstep almost all religious thinking requires. "I don't know, therefore God". I understand you don't ascribe (from what i can tell) any Abrahamic notion of God, to that issue but you're using it as a proper noun so its hard to ignore :P

The purpose is to keep ourselves humble and preferably out of holy wars. — Athena

The purpose of what?

That notion of God has closed people's minds to anything else. — Athena

Then what, in your view, is the use of the term? It seems that the Ancients as you're positing, were extremely misguided in their use of the concepts they pretended to. Calling the Sun a personal God is... wild... which is what Apollo is, essentially.

I do not know enough about physics to answer your question. Somehow there was an energy and that energy became manifest. This is the kind of thinking that goes with understanding the controlling force of the universe... — Athena

Huh. Fair enough. This appears to be magical thinking to me and is logically followed by "in the beginning there was the word, and the word was made flesh' type of stuff. Not my bag.

How did those gasses lead to the manifest universe? — Athena

They didn't. They are included in the manifest universe, not prior to it. So, i think this and the next response are a bit out of step with reality, to my mind.

What is supernatural about chi? — Athena

The entire concept is beyond natural laws. It is posited, as i've noted, that Qi carries multiple supernatural properties and exerts its force, supernaturally, upon the body and mind. I've outlined that, and your quotes don't approach those outlines.

There is connection with mitochondria and our breath that is also related to chi. — Athena

I cannot see any connection between any of these things in your comments and quotes, so i'll leave that part - I reject the notion still, though.

What keeps our heart in rhythm? — Athena

Its own electronic impulse - the cardiac conduction system. It is separate from the rest of the body's electric system as far as I know.

Some people may think that is a spiritual explanation. — Athena

They would be mistaken. Music's ability to 'heal' is squarely psychological, as opposed to medical (though, I agree both are essentially physical issues). It does not have any effect on specific functions of cells or healing properties of the body itself. It is like rest increasing your ability to heal..

Logos is a Greek concept, along with the notion of a God having 3 aspects, making the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost one god, not 3 gods. Christianity is Hellenized Judaism. The concept of logos is Greek, not Hebrew. — Athena

This doesn't answer either part of my question - but ftr, I am aware. I did not posit it was anything else.

But I want to defend the good of a man supporting the family financially while the woman supports the family emotionally and socially in many very important ways. — Athena

Agreed. my family works this way. But the idea that your dad actively discouraged you from education is wildly shitty to my mind.

then post a link that does — Athena

No. That is not what this link does. I does what I outlined immediately before posting it, funnily enough.

There is evidence that acupuncture may — Athena

Whenever you read this, the fact is there's no evidence. It just hasn't harmed anyone.

What is the success rate of acupuncture to quit smoking? — Yonsei Med J.

This quote contradicts itself. Reducing your smoking rate isn't quitting so they've counted people who didn't quit in their 'quit' number. Other thing to note is that expectation bias accounts for most results in open studies of that kind. Placebo-contrlled double blind is the standard here. It would also have been helpful to cite more than a weakly-supportive line. See further:

"Several researchers have conducted case control studies on smoking cessation acupuncture. He et al.19 reported that acupuncture treatment showed significant effectiveness in a case-control study, but most other researchers, including Parker et al.20 and Steiner et al.,21 reported that there was no apparent difference between the control and acupuncture treatment groups."

"Results of a meta-analysis of controlled trials were also negative.23"

"In this study, the smoking cessation success was only 1 case (0.6%) in the case group and none in the control group after 4 weeks."

"While the samples in this study could not be generalized because the subjects were limited in a certain area, this study suggests that smoking cessation acupuncture has no effect on the smoking cessation rate."

That's why placebo-control is so important. This paper is mostly outlining how bad the methodology is that has garnered positive outcomes. I have a feeling its possible you're not quite delving deep enough to make the types of claims you're making.

Something is happening and because this is proven insurance now pays for acupuncture treatments. — Athena

This is the result of pressure groups, not veracity, as shown above.

I do not understand why you speak of "the spiritual aspect"? What do you mean by spiritual? Is this in line with believing in angels and demons? — Athena

I am speaking directly about TCM. Consult TCM outlets for their take on it. I am using their terminology. I can't quite make sense of some of your questions. They seem to come from a genuine, but very much defensive place not quite in touch with teh subject matter. But I'm having fun..

There seems to be a gap between my consideration of energy and your consideration of the spiritual realm. — Athena

I don't know why you'd say this or what relevance it has. I've never tried to parallel them or outline my 'consideration'. Of course theres a gap between them - they are not related.

You seem to talk about the concepts you want to talk about regardless of the conversation. It makes it difficult to understand whether you understand what I'm saying. It appears not, a lot of the time.

Then what is capable of knowing things our minds are not able to know? It seems to me this is a bit backwards - If we can't know it, how can it be knowable? — AmadeusD

Even if you are brain surgeon, there is a lot you do not know. We rely on the experts and what each of them knows is very limited. Our brains are very limited when it comes to knowing a lot. That is a lot is not very much, but if we want we can google for information and maybe we will learn something or maybe not. Sometimes we put a whole team of people onto the task of learning something, like how to get to the moon. Or think historically before there was science. Not even the smartest people could know what we know today.

I just can't understand why you're invoking 'God' as a gap-filler in your knowledge. It seems to illustrate the very basic misstep almost all religious thinking requires. "I don't know, therefore God". I understand you don't ascribe (from what i can tell) any Abrahamic notion of God, to that issue but you're using it as a proper noun so its hard to ignore :P

Until you understand how little we can know, it might pointless to argue what is beyond our comprehension.

The purpose of what?

The purpose of accepting how very little we know.

"That notion of God has closed people's minds to anything else.
— Athena"

Then what, in your view, is the use of the term? It seems that the Ancients as you're positing, were extremely misguided in their use of the concepts they pretended to. Calling the Sun a personal God is... wild... which is what Apollo is, essentially.

If you think you know God, you know not God. You wrongly think you know God and this is why we should not name Him or make images of Him. We should stop deluding ourselves with the notion we know God.

"I do not know enough about physics to answer your question. Somehow there was an energy and that energy became manifest. This is the kind of thinking that goes with understanding the controlling force of the universe...
— Athena"

Huh. Fair enough. This appears to be magical thinking to me and is logically followed by "in the beginning there was the word, and the word was made flesh' type of stuff. Not my bag.

Scientific explanations of the beginning of the universe sound magical to you why? Logos is about empirical knowledge, not magic. You have me very confused. Is there any information that is not magical to you? I think you giving a good demonstration of the problem religion has caused.

How did those gasses lead to the manifest universe?
— Athena

They didn't. They are included in the manifest universe, not prior to it. So, i think this and the next response are a bit out of step with reality, to my mind.

I did not say those gases existed before the universe was manifested. It was manifested in an order and became increasingly complex.

What is supernatural about chi?
— Athena

The entire concept is beyond natural laws. It is posited, as i've noted, that Qi carries multiple supernatural properties and exerts its force, supernaturally, upon the body and mind. I've outlined that, and your quotes don't approach those outlines.

You will have to explain those supernatural properties before I can respond to what you are thinking. However this morning in the pool I was pondering why you are so resistant to the notion of Chi. How can you imagine a nervous system that connects the body with the brain and not Chi? What makes it different?

There is connection with mitochondria and our breath that is also related to chi.
— Athena

I cannot see any connection between any of these things in your comments and quotes, so i'll leave that part - I reject the notion still, though. [/qoute] Yes it is obvious you are not getting what I am saying and I am not getting what you are saying.

What keeps our heart in rhythm?
— Athena

Its own electronic impulse - the cardiac conduction system. It is separate from the rest of the body's electric system as far as I know.

Some people may think that is a spiritual explanation.
— Athena

They would be mistaken. Music's ability to 'heal' is squarely psychological, as opposed to medical (though, I agree both are essentially physical issues). It does not have any effect on specific functions of cells or healing properties of the body itself. It is like rest increasing your ability to heal..

I have to hurry this along as I have to get to work. From my point of view you are not thinking anything through. I wish I had more time. This link is about music affecting the growth of plants. https://www.google.com/search?q=music+effects+the+growth+of+plants&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS926US926&oq=music+effects+the+growth+of+plants&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIICAEQABgWGB4yCAgCEAAYFhgeMgoIAxAAGA8YFhgeMggIBBAAGBYYHjINCAUQABiGAxiABBiKBdIBCjExMDE5ajBqMTWoAgCwAgA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Logos is a Greek concept, along with the notion of a God having 3 aspects, making the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost one god, not 3 gods. Christianity is Hellenized Judaism. The concept of logos is Greek, not Hebrew.
— Athena

This doesn't answer either part of my question - but ftr, I am aware. I did not posit it was anything else.

But I want to defend the good of a man supporting the family financially while the woman supports the family emotionally and socially in many very important ways.
— Athena

Agreed. my family works this way. But the idea that your dad actively discouraged you from education is wildly shitty to my mind.

then post a link that does
— Athena

No. That is not what this link does. I does what I outlined immediately before posting it, funnily enough.

There is evidence that acupuncture may
— Athena

Whenever you read this, the fact is there's no evidence. It just hasn't harmed anyone.
What is the success rate of acupuncture to quit smoking? — Yonsei Med J.
That was made perfectly clear and the demonstrations of Chi are very real. I think it may be time to quit.
You can not understand anything if you are unwilling to do the thinking. Denying what is scientifically accepted such as proof of acupuncture brings us to a dead end.

You are right my focus became my own interest. I want to thank you for arguing against chi because that has pushed me to give chi, and energy in general, much more thought than I have given any of this stuff for many years. This feels like a return to youth when life felt much more interesting than it has felt in many years.

A fellow who uses the hot tub the same time I do, said we can become aware of our chi by cupping our hands as if we are holding a ball. In the past, that was obvious to me as I could feel the energy. Today I tried to feel that energy and it isn't there, which would make sense as I am having some health problems. My next thought is to get an aura reading to determine where my aura is weak and strong. Which falls back on our argument about chi. So now I am considering buying my own imaging equipment and eperimenting with it. Is it all hogwash or can aura imaging be another way to be aware of our chi and where it is flowing in a healthy way or where it is blocked and not flowing?

Does acupuncture change the aura? How about deep breathing and other health practices? Does music change the aura? If we can see change we can know something has caused the change.

If nothing else this could make an interesting youtube. Everyone can witness the experiments and give me feedback about what they think. Just hogwash or something to take seriously.

The entire concept is beyond natural laws. It is posited, as i've noted, that Qi carries multiple supernatural properties and exerts its force, supernaturally, upon the body and mind. I've outlined that, and your quotes don't approach those outlines. — AmadeusD

Can you direct me to that outline of what is supernatural about chi? To me what you said in the above quote, is like saying gravity has supernatural properties. Chi is simply a life force energy. That life force may be mitochondria.

"We now know that eukaryotes can live happily without any remnant of the mitochondria." Mitochondria are the descendants of bacteria that settled down inside primordial eukaryotic cells, eventually becoming the power plants for their new hosts."
https://www.science.org/content/article/first-eukaryotes-found-without-normal-cellular-power-supply#:~:text=%22We%20now%20know%20that%20eukaryotes,plants%20for%20their%20new%20hosts.

My line of reasoning is cause and effect, not supernatural.

Logos is a Greek concept, along with the notion of a God having 3 aspects, making the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost one god, not 3 gods. Christianity is Hellenized Judaism. The concept of logos is Greek, not Hebrew.
— Athena

This doesn't answer either part of my question - but ftr, I am aware. I did not posit it was anything else. — Athena

I do not understand why that does not answer your question. You posted.

Are you speaking about Logos as the Christian notion, or some other concept? In the former light, it seems a little weird to speak about in conjunction with Eastern, supernatural concepts.

Your question was

I don't know how these three are related, other than in a bit of esoteric thinking. What's the controlling force of the Universe in your view? Reason?

Logos, reason, and the controlling force of the universe are 3 aspects of the same thing, the same as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are three aspects of the same thing. That is Greek thinking and it did not work for Romans until they created new words to convey the Greek idea of a trinity. "Triad is the form of the completion of all things." Nichomachus of Gerasa (c. 100 A.D. Greek neo-Pythagorean philosopher and mathematician.

Even if you are brain surgeon, there is a lot you do not know. We rely on the experts and what each of them knows is very limited. Our brains are very limited when it comes to knowing a lot. That is a lot is not very much, but if we want we can google for information and maybe we will learn something or maybe not. Sometimes we put a whole team of people onto the task of learning something, like how to get to the moon. Or think historically before there was science. Not even the smartest people could know what we know today. — Athena

You're not really reading what i'm asking here, it seems.

I have asked you, if something is unknowable, how could you possibly learn it? It is impossible, was my point. I wondered how you dealt with it. You didn't :P

Until you understand how little we can know, it might pointless to argue what is beyond our comprehension. — Athena

This makes absolutely no sense. No one would ever, in their right mind, attempt to debate something incomprehensible. What I am trying to ask is why are you talking about hte possibility of knowing things which are, by your use of hte words, impossible to know? Seems like a pointless starting block to a pointless exercise in mystic thinking (nothing wrong with that, but it's not philosophy imo).

If you think you know God, you know not God. You wrongly think you know God and this is why we should not name Him or make images of Him. We should stop deluding ourselves with the notion we know God. — Athena

This is, again, an absolutely pointless statement designed to sidestep the incredible holes in previous statements. You can't make statements about Gods (for which we have all the receipts) and then pretend its some mystical concept that can't be talked about. Bit of a tautological way of ducking out..

Scientific explanations of the beginning of the universe sound magical to you why? Logos is about empirical knowledge, not magic. You have me very confused. Is there any information that is not magical to you? I think you giving a good demonstration of the problem religion has caused. — Athena

I think its possible you aren't really parsing the sentences you're reading very well. Nothing you've said here responds to what i've said in any reasonable way. That said, I disagree with everything in this passage and have no clue why you'd think my rejection of an explicitly Christian concept (Logos, as I noted, exists as a Christian concept - and that's what I asked you about and quoted in the above.... The fact that you then didn't respond to that is not going to deter me. It's what I asked about) has anything whatsoever to do with empirical anything - particularly at the birth of the universe - is quite strange given you're bothering to try to converse on these exact topics.

I did not say those gases existed before the universe was manifested. — Athena

How did those gasses lead to — Athena

Yes you did. Whether that was on purpose or not. This is kind of why I'm pushing back - you seem to contradict yourself quite a lot and I just want clear thoughts to be able to respond to. If you're not on that vibe, no worries. It may well just be that these are early formulations of your thoughts on these topics. That's fine too. Just wanting to be clear that I am not doing those two things, and that might be a bit of daylight between us. We're trying to do different things, it seems.

You will have to explain those supernatural properties before I can respond to what you are thinking. However this morning in the pool I was pondering why you are so resistant to the notion of Chi. How can you imagine a nervous system that connects the body with the brain and not Chi? What makes it different?

No, I wont, because they are not things I have come up with or supported. These are tenets of TCM practice and Qi as a concept. Have a two-minute read of this most basic explication of Qi. I quote from it:

"Qi is a mythical concept in traditional Chinese medicine and in Chinese martial arts."

"The Chinese Gods, especially anthropomorphic gods, are sometimes thought to have qi and be a reflection of the microcosm of qi in humans, both having qi that can concentrate in certain body parts."

We are operating in different dimensions if you do not read the above as Supernatural. I don't think its worthy continuing about Qi if you do not understand its most basic properties and bases for belief in it.

Yes it is obvious you are not getting what I am saying and I am not getting what you are saying.

This is not at all obvious, Athena. But that's why I left it there. It'll get prickly. No one likes to be told they are flat-out ignoring hte most crucial parts of an exchange.

I have to hurry this along as I have to get to work. From my point of view you are not thinking anything through. — Athena

The problem is, your point of view is clearly under-educated on these specific fields of enquiry and not partial to being confront with opposing evidence or concepts. A large swathe of what you're positing throughout this fairly varied exchange is illogical, internally inconsistent, historically inaccurate and incoherent. I find it quite hard to take your positions here seriously, in light of that. Cest la vie.

That was made perfectly clear and the demonstrations of Chi are very real. — Athena

They are not. You have provided no evidence for such, and more than a century of empirical research has provided absolutely nothing to substantiate the claims around Qi. I am not on the wrong side of this one, unless you're claiming that your faith in this concept is evidence. If that's the case, it is definitely time to quit.

You can not understand anything if you are unwilling to do the thinking. Denying what is scientifically accepted such as proof of acupuncture brings us to a dead end. — Athena

You are empirically wrong. I quoted from the link you provided squarely dismissing hte misleading and false inference you tried to make. I'm not going to play this game - you were factually wrong and didn't even read the study you provided. Your response is to claim that i'm somehow ignorant of 'the facts'. Bizarre.

My next thought is to get an aura reading to determine where my aura is weak and strong. — Athena

It is possible we have absolutely nothing more to discuss.

Can you direct me to that outline of what is supernatural about chi? To me what you said in the above quote, is like saying gravity has supernatural properties. Chi is simply a life force energy. That life force may be mitochondria. — Athena

This is absolutely not what Qi relates to at all, in any way, unless you're just making stuff up and claiming its Qi. The absolutely fact is that in TCM and Chinese Martial Arts Qi is a supernatural manifesting force. Rationalizing it into some medical explanation is just plainly stealing a Chinese concept and messing with it.

My line of reasoning is cause and effect, not supernatural. — Athena

That link has nothing to do with the disagreement we're having.

While I thank you for your time, I find you to be an obtuse and uninteresting interlocutor at this stage. Take care Athena :)

This makes absolutely no sense. No one would ever, in their right mind, attempt to debate something incomprehensible. What I am trying to ask is why are you talking about hte possibility of knowing things which are, by your use of hte words, impossible to know? Seems like a pointless starting block to a pointless exercise in mystic thinking (nothing wrong with that, but it's not philosophy imo). — AmadeusD

I would appreciate the quote you are objecting to because, worded as you worded what I said things don't make sense. I am quite sure I have repeatedly said our brains are limited. What we can know is limited by the fact that our brains are limited. You may use your brain to study brain surgery and that will not make you a good mechanic. We can expand the number of people in a pool of shared knowledge and still there is limit to what these people know. What group of people do you think have the most knowledge?

In 1600, what the most intelligent people on earth could have known, was extremely limited compared to what we know today. In 1600 they did not have the technology that we use for gathering information.
Also, the more we know the more we can know.

I don't think I ever said anything was impossible to know. I have spoken of the limits of what we can know, not something that we can not know. With a good microscope, we can know much more about microscopic things we could learn before the microscope. With our satellites traveling the universe we can learn far more today than we could a hundred years ago. Finally, what man on earth can know everything? What group of people can know everything?

I have asked you, if something is unknowable, how could you possibly learn it? It is impossible, was my point. I wondered how you dealt with it. You didn't :P — AmadeusD

Where did I say something is unknowable?

We are operating in different dimensions if you do not read the above as Supernatural. I don't think its worthy continuing about Qi if you do not understand its most basic properties and bases for belief in it. — AmadeusD

That is a perfect way to explain my frustration. You do not understand its most basic properties and bases for belief in it and you reject the modern acceptance of Chi.

Here is a modern explanation of acupuncture https://restorewellness.com.au/2016/05/1387/\\

Rejection of it as wrong as rejecting today's earth sciences because native Americans explained the earth needs our care. Science has proven them correct. The earth is a large living organization and disrupting one part of it affects another part.

The explanations have changed but the truth has not. And we don't think of Christians as being superstitious like other natives, but the religion is built on miracles and laying hands on someone to heal a person. These folks are working with Chi but that is not the word they use.

You seem to be entirely resistant to sense, empirical data and being confronted with the incredibly obvious failings in your writing. I do not mean to be rude, but it has become impossible not to be on-the-nose about how utterly bereft of coherence your side of this exchange has been.

I do not know why you are doing this. You have been presented with detailed, exact (with receipts) evidence to the contrary of your claims* - and you're continuing to essentially:

1. Lie about acupuncture* and Qi;
2. Make up new points that don't related to our actual discussion and pretend they are relevant***;
3. Continually posit empirical false claims, in the face of contrary evidence, and pretend to be tryign to be 'open minded'.
4. Provide links that are not in any way helpful. The most recent being an inaccurate and dishonest overview of work done in Korea, and a massaging terms to make it seem, extremely dishonestly, as if there is some support for supernatural crap from cultures(meaning ancient) that do not understand how to overcome bad practice and Mysticism, with no references or links to anything in support of it.

If you take 'evidence' be purely some horse crap posted on a website selling shit to you, I can only laugh and hope you get over your extremely deficiency in credulity.

*your own link directly contradicted the incredibly dishonest quoting you did from it....
**in what delusional world do you live, where we do not consider Christians superstitious? Are you literally fucking with me?

Given that we're no longer discussing the original issue, It seems fairly reasonable for me to point these things out. These failings will make it impossible to have productive conversations with anyone who doesn't share your peculiar distortions of logic, evidence and grammar.