Chi battery

I heard it said over the weekend that charging and discharging your dan-tien was similar to charging a battery. That analogy was flawed, as it is in fact the exact opposite. With a battery the more you repeat charging and discharging cycles, the weaker it becomes and it starts to lose its ability to hold charge. Where as with Taichi (and indeed most exercise) the opposite is true - the more cycles of training and rest you put your body through, the stronger you become. In other words the more you train (which is exhausting/discharging), the more you increase your body's ability to hold charge (or chi if you will).

How to reduce stress with martial arts

Discovered this WikiHow article on "How to Reduce Stress With Martial Arts" and I thought it had lots of good tips for people just starting with Tai Chi and other MA's with the intention of improving their health. I won't duplicate the post here, but it's well worth a read in my opinion.

http://www.wikihow.com/Reduce-Stress-With-Martial-Arts

Tai chi robot art

Check out this beautiful coloured rendition of the image that was specially commissioned for me as the SpiralWise logo. It was of course created by my very talented friend over at PerfectSphere who I realise I never previously credited publicly!:

The tai chi body language

Why is it that Tai Chi postures and body language postures are not the same? As Tai Chi is about natural movements that make optimal use of human biomechanics, it is a natural assumption that having "good posture" would be well communicated through the medium of body language. Indeed this was an implicit assumption that I made when I began (and for a long time afterwards). I subconsciously (for most body language is processed subconsciously) assumed that the best posture to adopt in Tai Chi would be the body language postures connected with strength, health, vitality, attractiveness etc. But this is not the case which is easiest to explain by example:

Considered the military soldier's "attention" posture (which was originally used when lining up with your enemy before a battle) - "chin up, stomach in, chest out", as a sergeant major might shout. This is very similar to the mating posture that humans use to signal attractiveness to the opposite sex - "Hold your head high, puff your chest out, and pull in your stomach to emphasise that sixpack".

 

Both these postures are designed to convey strength, power and vitality, which is actually what we are attempting to achieve with our Tai Chi training. But the standard Tai Chi posture is the opposite, "Tuck the chin in, let the stomach hang out (so that you can feel like you are sitting down), and hollow the chest so that you can feel rounded in the shoulders)". In other words, Tai Chi postures do not make you look attractive or powerful!

 

So what are the reasons for the stark difference?

First of all, body language postures are memes, they are learned behaviours. You learn from your parents and from society. Babies and young toddlers for instance adopt stances using principles similar to yoga or tai chi, and indeed you can observe that they breathe from the dan-tien from birth, before they "learn" not to. Society's definition of what is attractive (and hence what you are subconsciously taught to do) can bear very little relationship to what actually has a practical benefit. By analogy, consider the bizarre body appendages of a lot of species that been have naturally selected by evolution for attractiveness, but hamper their daily lives (think peacock's tails).

Another reason is that body language is about communication, moreover, visual communication at a distance. It is about signalling to other people. Tai Chi (and martial arts) postures on the other hand are about practical applications, when you are actually in contact with another person. The result in this case is more important than how it looks. To slightly abuse a phrase, body language is style over function, but martial arts are function over style.

The third issue that occurs to me is this may be why Tai Chi has gained a reputation of being a subtle or hidden art form. What this is really saying is that the body language postures you are displaying when you do it, are not recognised by the general population, and your effectiveness is therefore surprising. What you signal though your body language does not match your practical effectiveness and so could indeed be perceived as deceptive. Perhaps this is a reason that beginners find it difficult to learn, because of the striking contrast with the subconscious body language signalling.

Tai Chi could therefore be said not to be about learning, but to be about un-learning. And what is unlearning, but to return to emptiness?

Neuroscience vs Buddhism

Following yesterday's post I came across this opinion article on the connection between neuroscience and Buddhism. Clearly there is a lot out there about these connections. To quote a particularly juicy paragraph:

Western thought is hardly monolithic or simple, but monotheistic religions made a simple misstep when they didn’t apply naturalism to themselves and their notions of their souls. Time and again, their prominent scholars and philosophers rendered the human soul exceptional and otherworldly, falsely elevating our species above and beyond nature. We see the effects today. When Judeo-Christian belief conflicts with science, it nearly always concerns science removing humans from a putative pedestal, a central place in creation. Yet science has shown us that we reside on the fringes of our galaxy, which itself doesn’t seem to hold a particularly precious location in the universe. Our species came from common ape-like ancestors, many of which in all likelihood possessed brains capable of experiencing and manifesting some of our most precious “human” sentiments and traits. Our own brains produce the thing we call a mind, which is not a soul. Human exceptionalism increasingly seems a vain fantasy. In its modest rejection of that vanity, Buddhism exhibits less error and less original sin, this one of pride.

The author follows that up by making an interesting point. Buddhists are clearly happy to bask in the reinforcement of their beliefs by science, but will they be equally happy to accept that there is currently no scientific evidence for reincarnation?

Science vs Buddhism

An interesting, well produced video that highlights the strong parallels between the way both science and buddhism describe the world. [Original Source]:



Although the video is slightly laboured, I do find these parallels extremely thought provoking. Buddhism after all stands alone amongst world relgions due to its lack of a supreme deity (Buddha is NOT a God in case you were unaware!) and focuses on truely trying to understand reality. For further reading along similar lines I would recommend both these two books:

The Tao of Physics: An Exploration of the Parallels between Modern Physics and Eastern Mysticism








Einstein and Buddha: The Parallel Sayings

Common sense research

This is exactly the type of tai chi research that I dis-like. Although it’s all jolly good, positive stuff, my bug bear is highlighted below:

"Researchers at Tufts Medical Center in Boston performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of tai chi on psychological well-being. They reviewed the effects of tai chi on stress, anxiety, depression, mood disturbance and self-esteem. Forty studies with involving 3817 subjects met the researcher’s inclusion criteria.

The meta-analysis found significant reductions in stress, anxiety and depression and enhanced mood. Several studies also showed positive effects on self-esteem, but there was insufficient data to perform a meta-analysis for that outcome. The average age of subjects ranged from 11 to 85 years of age and included both healthy individuals and individuals with chronic conditions. The studies involved a wide range designs and the frequency and duration of tai chi practice varied widely.

The results of this analysis support the long held belief that tai chi is a beneficial mind/body practice, which relives stress and improves well-being, The research is also consistent with other recent research which shows positive psychological effects of exercise. More research will be required to show whether the benefits of tai chi on psychological well-being are equal to or greater than other exercises."

Essentially therefore, what we have is a statement of common-sense: "Exercise makes you feel better". Surprise. The key point (that I've highlighted) is the comparison to other exercise. Is Tai chi better for you psychologically than an equivalent amount of time spend in the gym or playing football or whatever? I suspect it is, but I'm not convinced. Until we know the answer to that, I'm afraid the above research can only be classed as tai chi propaganda. Truth yes, but not the whole truth.