I come from a physics background, I don't know the I Ching, but I don't reject it. If you think you are standing in the purgatory of science and blindly reject everything outside of science, then you do not know what science is. The boundaries of science itself are very narrow, and the discussion of many issues is itself outside the realm of science. If you are also studying physics, you should know that Pauli the god, Pauli incompatibility is what he proposed, when no physicist dared to lecture in front of him. He is a theoretical physicist, but he does physics experiments very poorly, all the proven experiments in his hands basically can not be repeated. And it developed to the point that, as long as he was present, all the physics experiments would have accidents, and they made fun of him as the Bubbleley effect. And Pauli himself is truly believe in the bubble effect, at that time in addition to him there is another person, analytical psychology Jung is also convinced of this. Bubbleley also visited Jung to discuss the matter. And a year before Jung's death, he wrote an article to elaborate on his understanding, and he came up with a new word - the principle of copula. You can read about it on Baidu if you're interested. Jung was very cautious about publicizing this idea of his, because he thought that it would probably lead to a piece of criticism and scolding and lead to his ruin, but he also felt that it would be a pity if these discoveries disappeared with his death, so he finally publicized it in his later years as a responsibility to human civilization. The principle of co-occurrence is something outside the realm of science, why? Why? Because science itself must go through observation, generalization and theory, theory and prophecy, and prophecy must be verified, and this verification must be repeatable. But the principle of commensurability cannot be verified repeatedly, and the process of observation is not the same as the scientific method. Here I can not say any more, by themselves Baidu it.

I Ching is metaphysics, I Ching is metaphysics, I Ching is metaphysics! Say the important things three times.

Metaphysics is metaphysics, not science. Those who say that the I Ching is science blaspheme the I Ching and blaspheme science, and to interpret metaphysics in terms of science is as absurd as to interpret science in terms of metaphysics. The only field where metaphysics and science intersect is philosophy. So in the field of spiritual philosophy, metaphysics even sometimes acts as an initiator and guide to science, and the results of scientific research confirm to some extent the unfathomable wisdom of metaphysics.

For example, scientific research out of quantum mechanics, breaking the traditional concept of physics, it seems that the material world is not real, confirming the "Heart Sutra" of the "color is not different from the air, the air is not different from the color, the color is empty, the air is color" realm, but we can not say that Buddhism is quantum mechanics.

For example, the Tao Te Ching says, "Tao begets one, two begets two, two begets three, three begets all things" and "something is born out of nothing", which seems to describe the Big Bang, the beginning of the creation of all things, but we can not say that Lao Tzu created the doctrine of the Big Bang.

Metaphysics and science, the two are just corroborating each other across time and space in the realm of spiritual philosophy, but in the end it's not the same thing, and the fact that A is highly similar to B doesn't mean A is B.

Digging deeper into this issue, that is, how we modern people look at metaphysics such as I Ching, how to explore the unknown with a tolerant mindset. In ancient times, metaphysics was developed and science was weak, if metaphysics blocked science, no scientific and technological progress, there would be no human civilization today. So in today's era of advanced science, do we still want to go back and accept the ancient metaphysics? This is a dialectical question, we should have a correct understanding, if we abandon science and accept the metaphysics, it is a big regression in history. So is it not desirable to have science as the only theory for everything and to reject all non-scientific things? Let's ask ourselves. I personally think it seems undesirable, for the simple reason that science is not the truth, science is also the development of new science may be fundamentally overthrow the old scientific system, so this is a dynamic process, today's level of science is not equal to the eternal truth, we are now exploring the universe with science, there are still a lot of areas are unknown, and now on the lid of the conclusive, as the science on the altar, is not it very ridiculous? Furthermore, the most important point, I don't know if you have found out that science focuses on the study of the laws of the material world, while metaphysics focuses on the study of the laws of the spiritual world, and uses the spiritual world as the starting point to study the relationship between human beings and all things. Therefore, metaphysics is more like a ponderous system of life experience, and her orientation is different from that of science, but both can be utilized for human beings. Metaphysics such as the I Ching has no value, history can explain the problem, if it is just a lie, no value, then it has been passed down for thousands of years, and has become the Chinese culture respected "the first of the group of scriptures," there is no reason.

Do we today want to label metaphysics with science, I have indicated my personal opinion above. Let me analyze the reason for this phenomenon today. To say that I Ching is science, to say that numerology is science, to say that feng shui is science, first of all, this statement is not valid, but why do you say so, let's see, what kind of people say these things? They are all people who preach I Ching, preach numerology, and preach Feng Shui. Why do they preach? In some ways it benefits him, nothing more than fame and fortune. Why do you use science to endorse metaphysics? Because it is said to be science, can be justified to promote, people's concept of "non-science" is equivalent to "superstition", if the I Ching "non-scientific", people get the information directly --If you say I Ching is "non-scientific", people will get the message that I Ching is "superstition", and it won't work.

This also reveals the awkward situation of metaphysics like I Ching in today's time, very ancient, very mysterious, very wonderful, but few knowledgeable people, without taking science to label, almost inches.

Personally, I think we're perfectly capable ofLook at science and metaphysics with an inclusive mindset; the material world is explored with science, and the spiritual world is experienced with metaphysicsThis is not a bad idea. There are too many unknowns in this world, science or metaphysics, are just tools for recognizing and exploring the world in the process of human development.

The history of astronomy was initiated by astrologers; the history of chemistry was initiated by alchemists; the history of medicine was initiated by sorcerers. History develops, and it is not possible for a son to disown his old man, nor is it possible for him to disown his old man and not his children and grandchildren.

Science is an import for China; modern science has not arisen in China and there is no soil for it to arise.

We are now talking about the I Ching, but is a reaction to our ancient civilization and culture of the work only, it and modern science is completely two systems of things, in fact, you think about it, in the ancient times of extremely low productivity, food and clothing can not be guaranteed, how to means to understand the universe, and even say what contains the world of all things, see the following chart of the introduction of an article on the I Ching.

As for the theory of relativity mentioned in the title as well as Newton's laws, these are some of the theories represented in recent modern science, compared to the I Ching, their function can be less exaggerated, they both have their scope of application, and they both have a large number of experiments to verify them, if the theory violates the experiments, it will either be corrected or nullified, and it is falsifiable, which is also the standard of science.

Finally, I have to say that whether or not a person believes in science and understands science is not something that can be determined just by saying that you have learned some theory of relativity and Newton's laws, such as Academician ZHU Qingshi, are you saying that he does not understand science? He has learned more scientific theories than most people, but why did he later take the initiative to publicize the true qi and yin and yang?

We have to remember one thing, science is a work in progress, the current scientific theories are all applicable at this stage, and it only makes sense that as time goes on, better and more comprehensive scientific theories will emerge.

I look forward to your review and attention!

What the questioner means is that the I Ching is not a science. Only "Relativity" and "Newton's Laws" are science. I would like to ask the questioner: Have you studied the I Ching? Do you know the I Ching? Why is the I Ching not science? How do you prove that relativity and Newton's laws are science? What do you know about science? Can you make it clear here? I don't think anyone can. Don't pretend to be so pretentious here! You're making it hard to test others!

Based on my understanding of the I Ching, I thought:In ancient times, people did not master modern science. Many natural phenomena could not be explained. Therefore, many unknown phenomena that had an impact on human activities were considered to be brought by God. Therefore, in case of trouble or before doing something, we have to use "divination" to pray and test.

Since "divination", there is "divination" after the interpretation of the statement, so people have "created" for different "divination So people "created" different interpretations for different "divination" results. This is the earliest prototype of the I Ching.

Due to the vastness of the region and the inconvenience of transportation at that time, people lacked communication and exchange with each other, which led to different methods of "divination" and interpretations from one region to another. What should be done?

When King Wen of Zhou was imprisoned in the city of P'yili, he standardized the different methods of divination and interpretations from all over the world, which later became known as the "Zhou Yi".

So why did he take the trouble to unify them all? I think: because he was ambitious, but also expected the Shang Dynasty is not far away from the end, and the only replacement is the Zhou Dynasty, which they will soon establish. So, after the Zhou Dynasty was established, what was used to unify everyone's thoughts? At that time, people trusted the arrangement of God the most. Divination" was the only way for human beings to communicate with the heavens. The I Ching was the only theory used to explain the results of divination. Therefore, the unified I Ching was taken as the theoretical basis for guiding people's thoughts and behaviors at that time. ......

Therefore, my conclusion is that the I Ching has nothing to do with science. Today, anyone who exaggerates the I Ching and makes it sound like a god is basically someone with ulterior motives!

I'm done answering, open to exploration, not rebuttal!

Say my opinion, I am doing architectural design, planning and architecture, especially when it comes to the protection of the old city or the protection and restoration of ancient buildings, will be involved in the examination of its historical history, speculation on the construction and layout of its way, so that can not be avoided involves the ancient feng shui, and therefore can not be bypassed the Five Elements, Bagua, Nine Palms and other ancient metaphysics of the basics, so simple to read the relevant books, including the I Ching.

Of course, Newton's three laws have been studied in school before, a brief history of time, three bodies, etc. have been read, relativistic quantum mechanics, Maxwell's equations have been heard of, and Hubble, redshift, Lagrangian, etc. can be slightly understood. So I think I know a little bit about all of them, so I'm trying to answer this question objectively.

Read the I Ching for the first time, obscure and difficult to understand, used to hold the idea of fortune-telling to see the trigrams to read, to see how metaphysics in the end. But when the first hexagrams dry hexagrams read, found that this is a book of reason, about the development of the law of the book, is about the emergence of different situations in accordance with the development of subsequent events how the impact of the book is to speak of the world's internal rules of simple materialism of the books, except that it will be the development of the rules of the rules of the classification of particularly detailed, and thus read it to understand the development of the foresight of the people of the things. Over time, by charlatans in the form of shaking the trigrams, the randomness of the sign and the I Ching combination, into a fortune-telling and prediction of metaphysics. In fact, I think that the metaphysical is not the I Ching, but the randomness, because you can not sway the random chance which sign will come out.

So, having said that. I personally believe that the I Ching alone is a book that belongs to the realm of philosophy, not metaphysics, and I'm a beginner, so I'll limit myself to personal experience.

Under normal circumstances, people, if you let ten people, for three days without giving them food, the result is that they should all feel hungry.

Then let these ten people describe the feeling of hunger and narrate it in 500 words, and ask: will their narratives be exactly the same?

Next, have the ten people go to a meal, and it is the same meal. After the meal, have these ten people describe how they felt after the meal, again in five hundred words, please, can you make sure that their accounts are all exactly the same?

If this is all figured out, what with the I Ching, the theory of relativity, the laws and all that, it should all be figured out, right?

If you can't even figure that out, then ...... lol.

If you really can't figure it out, then you should do an experiment yourself and mess with it every half month. Do it twenty-four times a year, and the experience will be profound.

Yours, understand?

I just can't figure out why people nowadays must lean on science for everything, do we, as a society, study everything to death?

I Ching has existed for so many years, is the crystallization of the wisdom of the ancients, the reasoning, the theory is a little difficult to understand, but I think this is also, this is normal, after all, is written by the ancients, you go to ask them is also unrealistic, can only be our own slow research. Speaking of science, who knows whether the descendants will say that relativity, Newton's three laws are not right it, some people take science every day, Christianity still exists, and did not see foreigners suspected, but also our Chinese, they have a little bit of something, thinking of overthrowing him, saying that it is not theirs, and only the foreign ones are good, which is the standard for people brainwashed by a foreign country!

Science is inconclusive. You can't use inconclusive science to evaluate Easy Trail.

Wrong. The I Ching is metaphysics, above science, and can't explain high level stuff with low level stuff.