Advertisement

Scientific Testing of Chi (Qi) Claims

  • Michael R. Matthews
Chapter
Part of the Science: Philosophy, History and Education book series (SPHE)

Abstract

Feng shui energy is yet to be identified and measured in any reputable laboratory. There have been some embryonic steps towards scientific validation of chi claims. Of special interest were those made by Dr Yan Xin, a former TCM practitioner who had worked in or visited different Chinese and US universities. Despite detailed and staggering claims made by Dr Xin and colleagues, none have ever survived a reputable test. One fallback option for chi theorists who wish to maintain the scientificity of their system and of the chi construct, yet who also acknowledge the reality that chi has never yet been found or measured, is to abandon the referential dimension of chi and to swing over to seeing chi as an intervening variable not a hypothetical construct. The final option for chi theorists who wish to retain the concept, while acknowledging that there is no non-inferential, immediate evidence for it, is to say that chi talk is metaphorical not literal. For the purpose of this book, these fundamental philosophical arguments need just be noted, not solved. Students and teachers can themselves, with time and curricula allowing, follow up the arguments and literature.

References

  1. Agazzi, E. (Ed.). (2017). Varieties of scientific realism: Objectivity and truth in science. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  2. Alston, W. P. (1996). A realist conception of truth. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Andersen, K. (2017). Fantasyland: How America went Haywire, a 500-year history. London: Ebury Press.Google Scholar
  4. Beinfield, H., & Korngold, E. (1991). Between heaven and earth: A guide to Chinese medicine. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  5. Bevilacqua, F. (2014b). Energy: Learning from the past. Science & Education, 23(6), 1231–1243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beyerstein, B. L., & Sampson, W. (1996b). Traditional medicine and pseudoscience in China: A report of the second CSICOP delegation (part 2). Skeptical Inquirer, 20(5). https://www.csicop.org/si/show/china_conference_2
  7. Black, M. (1962). Models and metaphors. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Boudry, M., Blancke, S., & Braeckman, J. (2012). Grist to the mill of anti-evolutionism: The failed strategy of ruling the supernatural out of science by philosophical fiat. Science & Education, 21, 1151–1165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bunge, M. (2001). Philosophy in crisis: The need for reconstruction. Amherst: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
  10. Bunge, M. (2003). Emergence and convergence: Qualitative novelty and the unity of knowledge. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  11. Bunge, M. (2006). Chasing reality: Strife over realism. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bunge, M. (2009). Advantages and limits of naturalism. In J. R. Shook & P. Kurtz (Eds.), The future of naturalism (pp. 43–63). Amherst: Humanity Books.Google Scholar
  13. Bunge, M. (2012a). Evaluating philosophies (Boston studies in the philosophy of science) (Vol. 295). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  14. Bunge, M. (2012b). The correspondence theory of truth. Semiotica, 188, 65–76.Google Scholar
  15. Chen, K. (2002). Review of Lu Zuyin ‘Scientific Qigong exploration: The wonders and mysteries of Qi’. Journal of Scientific Exploration, 16(3), 483–489.Google Scholar
  16. Coopersmith, J. (2010). Energy, the subtle concept: The discovery of Feynman’s blocks from Leibniz to Einstein. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Cross, T. (2005). What is a disposition? Synthese, 144, 321–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Devitt, M. (1991). Realism & truth (2nd ed.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  19. Dijksterhuis, E. J. (1961/1986). The mechanization of the world picture. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Dikotter, F. (2010). Mao’s great famine: The history of China’s most devastating catastrophe 1958–1962. New York: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  21. Duit, R. (1991). The role of analogy and metaphor in learning science. Science Education, 75, 649–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Eitel, E. J. (1873/1987). Feng shui: The rudiments of natural science in China. Hong Kong: Lane Crawford (Graham Brash, Singapore).Google Scholar
  23. Fang, L. (2016). The most wanted man in China: My journey from scientist to enemy of the state (P. Link, Trans.). New York: Henry Holt & Co.Google Scholar
  24. Feyerabend, P. K. (1975). Against method. London: New Left Books.Google Scholar
  25. Fishman, Y. I. (2009). Can science test supernatural worldviews? Science & Education, 18(6–7), 813–837.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fishman, Y. I., & Boudry, M. (2013). Does science presuppose naturalism (or, indeed, anything at all)? Science & Education, 22(5), 921–949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gould, S. J. (1997). Nonoverlapping magisteria. Natural History, 106, 16–22. Reprinted in R. Pennock (ed.), Intelligent design creationism and its critics: Philosophical, theological, and scientific perspectives. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 2001, 737–749.Google Scholar
  28. Graham, A. C. (1989). Disputers of the Tao: Philosophical argument in ancient China. LaSalle: Open Court.Google Scholar
  29. Harding, S. G. (Ed.). (1976). Can theories be refuted? Essays on the Duhem-Quine thesis. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
  30. Harman, P. M. (1982). Energy, force and matter: The conceptual development of nineteenth-century physics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Harré, R. (1964). Matter and method. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hesse, M. B. (1966). Models and analogies in science. South Bend: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
  33. Hintikka, J. (Ed.). (1994). Aspects of metaphor. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  34. Holton, G. (1986). Metaphors in science and education. InThe advancement of science and its burdens (pp. 229–252). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Huston, P. (1995). China, chi and chicanary: Examining traditional Chinese medicine and chi theory. Skeptical Inquirer, 19(5), 38–42.Google Scholar
  36. Joravsky, D. (1970). The Lysenko affair. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  37. Kaptchuk, T. J. (2000). Chinese medicine: The web that has no weaver. London: Rider.Google Scholar
  38. Kovoor, A. (1978). Begone godmen! Encounters with spiritual frauds. Mumbai: Jaico.Google Scholar
  39. Li, Z. (1996). The private life of chairman Mao: The memoirs of Mao’s personal physician. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  40. Lin, Z. X., Yu, L., Guo, Y. Z., Zhang, H. L., Shen, Z. Y., & Zhang, T. L. (2000). Qigong: Chinese medicine or pseudoscience? Amherst: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
  41. Liu, J. L. (2015). In defense of Chinese Qi-naturalism. In C. Li, F. Perkins, K. Alan, & L. Chan (Eds.), Chinese metaphysics and its problems (pp. 33–53). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lu, Z. (1997). Scientific Qigong exploration: The wonders and mysteries of Qi. Malvern: Amber Leaf Press.Google Scholar
  43. MacCorquodale, K., & Meehl, P. (1948). On a distinction between hypothetical constructs and intervening variables. Psychological Review, 55, 95–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Machamer, P. (2000). The nature of metaphor and scientific descriptions. In F. Hallyn (Ed.), Metaphor and analogy in the sciences (pp. 35–52). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Puüishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mahner, M. (2012). The role of metaphysical naturalism in science. Science & Education, 21(10), 1437–1459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Matthews, M. R. (Ed.). (1998). Constructivism and science education: A philosophical examination. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  47. Matthews, M. R. (2000). Constructivism in science and mathematics education. In D. C. Phillips (Ed.), National society for the study of education, 99th yearbook (pp. 161–192). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  48. Matthews, M. R. (2012). Philosophical and pedagogical problems with constructivism in science education. Tréma, 38, 41–56.Google Scholar
  49. Matthews, M. R. (2015a). Science teaching: The contribution of history and philosophy of science: 20th anniversary revised and enlarged edition. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  50. Matthews, M. R. (2015b). Reflections on 25-years of journal editorship. Science & Education, 24(5–6), 749–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. McCarthy, C. L. (2018). Cultural studies of science education: An appraisal. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), History, philosophy and science teaching: New perspectives (pp. 99–136). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. National Academy of Science (NAS). (1998). Teaching about evolution and the nature of science. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  53. Ortony, A. (Ed.). (1979). Metaphor and thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Pellegrino-Estich, R. (2001). The miracle man: The life story of Joao de Deus. Cairns: Triad Publishers.Google Scholar
  55. Pennock, R. T. (1999). Tower of Babel: The evidence against the new creationism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Randi, J. (1987). The faith healers. Buffalo: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
  57. Randi, J. (1992). Conjuring: Being a definitive history of the venerable arts of sorcery, prestidigitation, wizardry, deception, & chicanery, and of the mountebanks & scoundrels who have perpetrated these subterfuges on a bewildered public, in short, MAGIC! New York: St Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  58. Randi, J. (1995). An encyclopedia of claims, frauds, and hoaxes of the occult and supernatural. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  59. Ricci, M. (1615/1953). On the Christian mission among the Chinese. In L. L. Gallagher (Ed.), China in the sixteenth century: The journals of Matthew Ricci (pp. 1583–1610). New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  60. Sampson, W. (1996). Antiscience trends in the rise of the “alternative medicine” movement. In P. R. Gross, N. Levitt, & M. W. Lewis (Eds.), The flight from science and reason (pp. 188–197). Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Schimmel, S. (2008). The tenacity of unreasonable beliefs: Fundamentalism and the fear of truth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Schofield, R. E. (1970). Mechanism and materialism: British natural philosophy in an age of reason. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Selin, H. (Ed.). (2003). Nature across cultures: Views of nature and the environment in non-Western cultures. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  64. Sherman, T. F. (2018). Energy, entropy, and the flow of nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  65. Slezak, P. (2012). Review of Michael Ruse Science and spirituality: Making room for faith in the age of science. Science & Education, 21, 403–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Stenger, V. J. (1990). Physics and psychics: The search for a world beyond the senses. Amherst: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
  67. Stenger, V. J. (2007). God: The failed hypothesis: How science shows that god does not exist. Amherst: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
  68. Stoljar, D. (2010). Physicalism. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  69. Tobin, K. (Ed.). (1993). The practice of constructivism in science and mathematics education. Washington, DC: AAAS Press.Google Scholar
  70. Tobin, K. (2000). Constructivism in science education: Moving on. In D. C. Phillips (Ed.), Constructivism in education (pp. 227–253). Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education.Google Scholar
  71. Tobin, K. (2015). Connecting science education to a world in crisis. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 1, 2.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s41029-015-0003-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Too, L. (1998). Essential feng shui: A step-by step guide to enhancing your relationships, health and prosperity. London: Random House.Google Scholar
  73. van Fraassen, B. C. (2002). The empirical stance. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  74. Weinert, F. (1995). The Duhem-Quine thesis revisited. International Studies in Philosophy of Science, 9(2), 147–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Westfall, R. S. (1971). The construction of modern science: Mechanisms and mechanics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  76. Wicker, C. (2005). Not in Kansas anymore: A curious tale of how magic is transforming America. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  77. Wozniak, J. A., Wu, S., & Wang, H. (2001). Yan Xin Qigong and contemporary sciences. Champaign: International Yan Xin Qigong Association.Google Scholar
  78. Yan, X., Lu, F., Jiang, H., Cao, W., Xia, Z., Shen, H., Wang, J., Dao, M., Lin, H., & Zhu, R. (2002). Journal of Scientific Exploration, 16(3), 381–411.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael R. Matthews
    • 1
  1. 1.University of New South WalesSydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations