God versus Science

[Chiahua]

sorry, long post

Thank you for an excellent post Sihing:

One part of OldLiu's arguement is that there should be clearly defined and recorded proof of Chi Kung curing cancer. I agree with him, but I also think he is too early. The right time will be when there has been a sufficient shift in global conciousnes, allowing for an open and independant investigation. At that point, Shaolin Wahnam will be in a position to participate - or even lead the way.

I think fundamental to the discussion is a commonly agreed upon standard of proof. For instance, he was asking for proof of Sihing Damian's credentials. I provided a listing from the official body governing Radiologists in Malaysia, with a link to the what credentials are expected of Radiologists in that country. To me, membership in a governing body constituted "sufficient proof"--meaning that I trust the organization to screen its own members.
He looks for proof of cancer with Case studies. I'm sure Sifu and my Sihings can provide those with ease. That's not enough for our banned friend. He'll demand it to be notarized, signed by a doctor--fine. But when we do that, he may call into question whether it was spontaneous remission--and on and on. Spontaneous remission does happen, so he'd only be satisfied with proper control--that all other factors that might contribute to remission are eliminated except for the chi kung. Unfortunately, "scientific control" on that level may not be feasible.
In the prevailing medical paradigm the gold standard of "proof" is not just a single random controlled double blind trial, but a meta-analysis pooling several RCTs, each with a minimum of 30 subjects each (preferably more). Even then, that "gold standard" of proof may not be the appropriate standard to use in the case of chi kung. One of the cruxes that controlled trials rely on is the absence of expectation on the part of the patient--to minimize the placebo effect. In the chi kung paradigm, the most crucial element is the mind. If it were possible to eliminate expectations on the part of the patients, then I would be very doubtful that the chi kung would work--we'd effectively eliminate the crucial "heart of confidence". Still, there's work being done by Harvard Cardiologist Herbert Benson on the relaxation response that might show the way.

Actually, the real issue is more legalistic; he has a problem with how things are phrased: "chi kung cures cancer". Would he be satisfied if it were changed to "chi kung is beneficial for those who are diagnosed with cancer These claims have not been evaluated by an independent medical association."?

@Sijie Racheli: you are absolutely right about using "cult" as a last option. Funny that he levelled the charge of ad hominem attacks on us when he goes ahead and "returns the favor"; couched in many more words.

[Charles David]

Criticising the School

Dear Family,

I have written a private letter to Steve letting him know that I am disheartened by his behaviour. Allow me to explain why.

Steve believes that he is doing our school a service by coming to the forum to criticise our actions. Perhaps he thinks that doing so demonstrates an open mind, and is evidence that we are not a "cult".

In fact, his behaviour demonstrates clearly his disrespect for our school. Observe:

Why do we pretend to be reasonable, open-hearted and forgiving,

Without putting too fine a point on it, he is basically calling us liars.

Or this:

If we are not a cult (or utterly convinced by our dogma),

Obviously, this suggest that Steve himself suspects we are a cult.

Well as Racheli has pointed out, one of the features of a cult that Wahnam lacks is that we do not compel students to stay. In fact, the opposite is true: the student must be prove themselves worthy.

Steve, without putting too fine a point on it, if you feel our school is being mismanaged and that your brothers and sisters are merely faking our benefits, you are free to leave.

If you are, in fact, having

nagging doubts

I suggest that you may be practicing the wrongs arts and that leaving the school may be in your best interest. I know that I wouldn't want to be in any school about which I harboured such negative views

If you have any further criticism of individuals in our school, take it up with them in person.

If you have a problem with the way our school is run, direct your complaint to our Sifu.

If you want to talk badly about our school, its students or our Sifu, you will have to do it somewhere else.

This is simply common sense.



With Salutations,


Charles

[Charles David]

Darran,

I am surprised that you are

saddened that old-liu has been banned.

There is no reason we should host a hateful and malicious guest.



Still,


Charles

[Zhang Wuji]

Hello everybody

This thread started out well but it recently became a hate campaign of sorts, thanks to Old Liu. It is a pity, really. In his earlier posts, I found Old Liu to be balanced and rational. I think he has over-reacted to certain posts. But that is no excuse for being rude.

This thread has brought another issue to the surface – how do we prove what we say is true? One of the tenets of our Shaolin Wahnam philosophy is that we do not accept anything on blind faith, but experience it ourselves (as Omar has put it so well in this thread).

That does not mean though that we invite every person who disagrees with us to come to a Shaolin Waham class and experience our benefits for themselves. Let’s be very clear about this: Prospective students are not invited to a Shaolin Wahnam class or course. They apply. And application does not equate acceptance.

We teach only deserving students for the good of the school and the Shaolin arts. It is also good for the prospective student. Coming to a class with all the wrong motives just wastes his or her time.

[steve]

You miss the point.

A martial artist takes responsibility when he’s attacked. He doesn’t blame the attacker.

If you keep on getting flu, is it the flu to blame, or your immune system.

[steve]

Do your homework and be respectful.

Mark Blohm (a Wahnam student) threw the first punch. It was totally unnecessary. Old Liu and everybody else at this stage were politely/happily debating the topic.

[Charles David]

Wu De

A martial artist takes responsibility when he’s attacked. He doesn’t blame the attacker.

A martial artist defends himself when he is attacked.

We cannot take responsibility for others actions. Old Liu chose to fly off the handle, blow his lid, what-have you. A more balanced individual would behave in a more balanced way. It would be preposterous for us to take responsibility for his outbursts.

We are also not responsible for his lack of experience, understanding and subsequent righteous indignation coupled with threats and insults.

If you keep on getting flu, is it the flu to blame, or your immune system.

It is a very poor analogy, since we are not sick. Old Liu's manic behaviour reflects badly on him, not us. If one bothers to read the thread, they can see that our students were gracious and kind to him even after his outrageous outbursts and accusations.

I will repeat myself: If you have a problem with the way our school is run, consult our Sifu.


Unswervingly Yours,


Charles

[Charles David]

Personal and Professional Conduct

Mark Blohm (a Wahnam student) threw the first punch. It was totally unnecessary. Old Liu and everybody else at this stage were politely/happily debating the topic.

If you had a problem with Mark's behaviour you should have spoken to him privately. This is a common courtesy and is an obligation in most professions.


That being said, I disagree with your analysis. Old Liu had, at that point already suggested that our Sifu was a fraud. His thoughts on this matter became very obvious only later, but innuendo was already there. Unlike you, Mark was perspicacious enough to notice. Warning Old Liu to mind his manners was not out of line. Old Liu might just as easily have said something like, "Thank you for pointing my error out to me, I am not certain how to behave in Kung Fu culture." But he chose to get his hackles up, blowing it out of proportion: calling it "sinister", giving us our first taste of his emotional hyperbole.

We are not responsible for Old Liu's actions.


Your behaviour is not reflective of a Wahnam student. I would not be surprised at all if our Sifu asked you to leave the school. I have kindly warned you on two occassions to be respectful in your interactions with classmates but you have chosen to ignore me and continue your unwarranted criticism.

You are arrogant enough to think that you know better than your seniors and your Sifu how to run our forum and our school, but you do not. You think that you need to step in to fix a situation, but you do not. You think that your classmates and your Sifu are somehow out of line, but we are not.

I suggest that you take a step back and think these things through.

If you want to continue arguing, I doubt it will be as a Wahnam student.



Still,


Charles

[Darran]

I must admit to have missed the crucial posts when everything 'kicked off' due to being away for a couple of days....and I have still not had time to go back and read everything so I cannot comment any further until I have done so, which due to my work schedule which looks like it will be next week now.
However I believe the following words from sigung Wong are appropriate:

"Shaolin teaching is opposed to brutality and aggressiveness"

"A basic tenet of the shaolin teaching, is that one should not accept anything on faith alone (....)"

from The Art of Shaolin Kung Fu.

[Andrew]

I, too, have not been following this thread. However, I do have 2 specific comments:

1. Charles has done a very good job of handling this "situation" and, from what I know, has full support of Sifu and the Shaolin Wahnam Instructors in his actions
2. Darran's last post is interesting. I would like to add a couple of other important aspects:

a. To learn the Shaolin Arts, which are elite Arts, is a privilege and not a right
b. To be eligible to learn these Arts, one must prove they are deserving to receive these elite teachings
c. Once the student has started their training, they will indeed be encouraged to judge on their own experiences rather than blind faith
d. Those wishing proof of any claims should at the very least be prepared to walk the route needed to prove them for themselves. It is not our task to convince them.

[Andrew]

And one more comment:

If anyone is dissatisfied by what they learn, the results they achieve, the teacher, the school, the system -- then they are free to leave and we will wish them well on their way. Our doors remain open and unlocked for their exit.

[steve]

All too bad! I've expressed my view.

[Andrew]

Steve,

Was that your application to leave?

[Marcus]

Steve,

You have been warned before, about your conduct here on the forum by myself and others.

Your conduct as a Shaolin Wahnam Student is frankly not that of a deserving student - it is a disgrace that you cannot see that Old Liu's later posts were a hate campaign. What is even worse though, is if you did see this and twisted it to attack your own school - which is what you seem to be doing. I would interpret this as a sign of betrayal.

The Shaolin Wahnam school policy is clear - that whilst we are tolerant and generous, we do not have to explain our actions to others. If you cannot accept the school policy you should leave.

However if you choose to stay and your conduct here on the forum, as a Shaolin Wahnam student does not improve you will be asked to leave.

Please consider this your final warning.

Marcus
Namo Amitabha Buddha Namo Amitabha Buddha Namo Amitabha Buddha

[Ronan]

If someone was causing this much hassle in any traditional Dojo or Kwoon they would've been shown the door long ago. Sifu put it ver well

we don't have to explain our action to others. Hence, we don’t have to think up clever ways to stop outsiders or disagreeing students from asking why. We just tell outsiders that it is none of their business, and disagreeing students that they should leave the school if they cannot agree with the school policy.