3 ms·

Qi is neither necessary nor sufficient to explain or describe any physical, emotional, cognitive, social or "spiritual" phenomena. It is certainly not emergent

Qi is neither necessary nor sufficient to explain or describe any physical, emotional, cognitive, social or "spiritual" phenomena. It is certainly not emergent (nor is software). To paraphrase Dawkins, you already don't believe in homunculi, aether, or many other previous attempts to explain our experience of being ourselves. Qi is just another thing to not believe, try it.

colordrops 11y ago
> Qi is neither necessary nor sufficient to explain or describe any physical, emotional, cognitive, social or "spiritual" phenomena Care to be more specific? How do the terms "necessary" and "sufficient" come into play? It's not a binary "all" or "nothing" distinction. If something helps you even a little bit, then it's valuable. An easy to grasp model of your body's state can help you maintain awareness of that state, and thus improve it. Also, what do homunculi, aether, etc have to do with Qi? Qi is a useful abstraction. I've never claimed that it exists as an objective property of the universe.
- austinjp 11y ago
  Hi there. Sure -- "Necessary" and "sufficient" are technical terms: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity_and_sufficiency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity_and_sufficiency You described Qi as "the perception of a composite of the various aspects of a body's state as well as mental awareness of that state". I'm saying Qi is neither necessary nor sufficient to perceive these things. Similarly, I could say "Aether carries the mental awareness of my body's state". Or "Tiny homuncli exist in my brain, and it's the job of one of them to make me aware of my body's state". These things are neither necessary nor sufficient to explain awareness of ones own body. Consequently they could detract from explanations that may be genuinely useful. It seems difficult to point to exactly what Qi is, and how it's different from similarly vague postulations. Whether your idea of Qi helps you or not wasn't mentioned in your previous comment, so I wasn't responding to that. If Qi is simply an "abstraction" then we can call it whatever we want. Why call it Qi? If Qi is not "an objective property of the universe" is it entirely a subjective property of whoever believes in it? If that's the case, I'd struggle to understand how "useful" it is. Certainly, I can see that things like self-awareness, relaxation, mindfulness, stillness and so on are "useful". They can be potent, restorative, healthful, etc, and we can demonstrate those effects through experiment. Unfortunately concepts like Qi tend to unravel in the light of experiment because they are so indefinable. Or more accurately: the definition constantly seems to shift. Not everything is definable, of course. I have no issue with finding beauty, wonder and awe in life. In fact -- that's probably one important element in living well. Ultimately I don't particularly mind if you believe in something called Qi, although I find it odd, and I hope you have a happy life :)

colordrops 11y ago

> Qi is neither necessary nor sufficient to explain or describe any physical, emotional, cognitive, social or "spiritual" phenomena Care to be more specific? How do the terms "necessary" and "sufficient" come into play? It's not a binary "all" or "nothing" distinction. If something helps you even a little bit, then it's valuable. An easy to grasp model of your body's state can help you maintain awareness of that state, and thus improve it. Also, what do homunculi, aether, etc have to do with Qi? Qi is a useful abstraction. I've never claimed that it exists as an objective property of the universe.

austinjp 11y ago
Hi there. Sure -- "Necessary" and "sufficient" are technical terms: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity_and_sufficiency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity_and_sufficiency You described Qi as "the perception of a composite of the various aspects of a body's state as well as mental awareness of that state". I'm saying Qi is neither necessary nor sufficient to perceive these things. Similarly, I could say "Aether carries the mental awareness of my body's state". Or "Tiny homuncli exist in my brain, and it's the job of one of them to make me aware of my body's state". These things are neither necessary nor sufficient to explain awareness of ones own body. Consequently they could detract from explanations that may be genuinely useful. It seems difficult to point to exactly what Qi is, and how it's different from similarly vague postulations. Whether your idea of Qi helps you or not wasn't mentioned in your previous comment, so I wasn't responding to that. If Qi is simply an "abstraction" then we can call it whatever we want. Why call it Qi? If Qi is not "an objective property of the universe" is it entirely a subjective property of whoever believes in it? If that's the case, I'd struggle to understand how "useful" it is. Certainly, I can see that things like self-awareness, relaxation, mindfulness, stillness and so on are "useful". They can be potent, restorative, healthful, etc, and we can demonstrate those effects through experiment. Unfortunately concepts like Qi tend to unravel in the light of experiment because they are so indefinable. Or more accurately: the definition constantly seems to shift. Not everything is definable, of course. I have no issue with finding beauty, wonder and awe in life. In fact -- that's probably one important element in living well. Ultimately I don't particularly mind if you believe in something called Qi, although I find it odd, and I hope you have a happy life :)