The Concept of Qi in Tai Chi and Qigong: Pseudoscientific, But So What?
George Bao, MD, Assistant Professor of Clinical Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine
As meditation becomes more popular among Westerners for enhancing mental and physical health, health professionals and scientists will attempt to examine its efficacy and the validity of its concepts. One such concept that has puzzled physicians, scientists, and patients in the West is qi. Often translated as "energy" or "vital energy," qi may be viewed as analogous to the concept of matter found in the philosophy of Plato and Aristotle.
Qi is a central concept in tai chi and qigong. Both tai chi and qigong are forms of meditation based on Daoist philosophical principles, involving controlled breathing techniques and graceful movements. In ancient Chinese philosophy, illness is often conceived as an imbalance of the body's qi or from an impediment to the harmonious flow of the body's qi, and both tai chi and qigong aim to balance this flow of qi to improve health.
Qi is not falsifiable and thus cannot be subject to scientific inquiry. Understandably, scholars in various disciplines have criticized it as "pseudoscientific." Even as medical research reveals the real health benefits of tai chi and qigong, many wonder how to treat this foreign and seemingly outdated concept when promoting these meditative practices. While some tai chi and qigong practitioners insist on the existence of qi, more skeptical thinkers might suggest that a scientific understanding should replace this "superstitious" idea.
Both sides, however, should consider a few subtle, clarifying points often missing from the discussion. First, as an ancient metaphysical concept, qi is not intended to be subject to modern scientific scrutiny, and science's inability to verify its existence does not affirm its nonexistence. In fact, under the philosophical system of epistemological idealism, qi cannot be said to be less real than things that are verifiable by the scientific method. Similarly, under the instrumental and pragmatic view of science, health professionals and scientists should be cautious not to declare what is metaphysically real or not real but instead what is useful and not useful.
Second, even though qi may be pseudoscientific, it remains useful and indispensable to the correct practice of tai chi and qigong. Tai chi and qigong practitioners routinely imagine the flow of qi to guide their movements, breathing, and mental activity. Ultimately, the precise movements, breathing techniques, and mental states achieved during practice are believed to bring about mental and physical health. As such, qi and related metaphysical concepts serve as a useful mental model during practice, and belief in their existence may be viewed as an "expedient means" to allow one to achieve one's health and spiritual goals.
Third, believing in qi need not interfere with science's endeavor to scrutinize and explore the utility of tai chi and qigong. These practices have evolved and progressed over the centuries and will continue to as modern science sheds light on their utility. The philosophical ideas grounding them have accompanied those changes and may also be altered or adapted to new scientific understanding.
Qi is a central concept in tai chi and qigong. Both tai chi and qigong are forms of meditation based on Daoist philosophical principles, involving controlled breathing techniques and graceful movements. In ancient Chinese philosophy, illness is often conceived as an imbalance of the body's qi or from an impediment to the harmonious flow of the body's qi, and both tai chi and qigong aim to balance this flow of qi to improve health.
Qi is not falsifiable and thus cannot be subject to scientific inquiry. Understandably, scholars in various disciplines have criticized it as "pseudoscientific." Even as medical research reveals the real health benefits of tai chi and qigong, many wonder how to treat this foreign and seemingly outdated concept when promoting these meditative practices. While some tai chi and qigong practitioners insist on the existence of qi, more skeptical thinkers might suggest that a scientific understanding should replace this "superstitious" idea.
Both sides, however, should consider a few subtle, clarifying points often missing from the discussion. First, as an ancient metaphysical concept, qi is not intended to be subject to modern scientific scrutiny, and science's inability to verify its existence does not affirm its nonexistence. In fact, under the philosophical system of epistemological idealism, qi cannot be said to be less real than things that are verifiable by the scientific method. Similarly, under the instrumental and pragmatic view of science, health professionals and scientists should be cautious not to declare what is metaphysically real or not real but instead what is useful and not useful.
Second, even though qi may be pseudoscientific, it remains useful and indispensable to the correct practice of tai chi and qigong. Tai chi and qigong practitioners routinely imagine the flow of qi to guide their movements, breathing, and mental activity. Ultimately, the precise movements, breathing techniques, and mental states achieved during practice are believed to bring about mental and physical health. As such, qi and related metaphysical concepts serve as a useful mental model during practice, and belief in their existence may be viewed as an "expedient means" to allow one to achieve one's health and spiritual goals.
Third, believing in qi need not interfere with science's endeavor to scrutinize and explore the utility of tai chi and qigong. These practices have evolved and progressed over the centuries and will continue to as modern science sheds light on their utility. The philosophical ideas grounding them have accompanied those changes and may also be altered or adapted to new scientific understanding.