An Understanding of Body-Mind Relation Based on Eastern Movement Disciplines and Its Implication in Physical Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The body-mind relation has been discussed for centuries in the West. This paper explores the body-mind relation through the conceptual frameworks of Eastern Dao and Yin-Yang theories in order to seek a fuller understanding of holistic approaches to body-mind relations from the Eastern perspective. It argues that the body-mind is a holistic unity. Fundamental Eastern philosophical concepts, including Dao, Qi, and Yin-Yang, were discussed for the sake of assisting the understanding of holism. It seems that the integration of Eastern movement disciplines such as Eastern martial arts (e.g., Karate, Tai Chi) and Eastern meditation practices (e.g., Yoga and Qi Gong) in physical education would benefit Westerners ’ understanding of body-mind wholeness. Dans les pays occidentaux, la relation corps-esprit alimente la discussion depuis plusieurs siècles. Cette étude examine la relation corps-esprit en passant par les cadres conceptuels des théories orientales du Dao et du Yin-Yang pour expliquer les approches holistiques face à la relation corps-esprit dans une perspective orientale. Le document explique que le corps-esprit constitue une unité holistique. On s’est penché sur les concepts philosophiques occidentaux de base, y compris le Dao, le Qi et le Yin-Yang,
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".