Guest guest Posted July 23, 2004 Report Share Posted July 23, 2004 In a message dated 7/23/04 8:20:51 PM, Chinese Medicine writes: << IMHO, I agree that our literary tradition, by definition, is not at the cutting edge, but I do think it represents the " best part " >> Lon: Wouldn't " cutting edge " and " best part " be equivelent? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 25, 2004 Report Share Posted July 25, 2004 Chinese Medicine , Spiritpathpress@a... wrote: > > In a message dated 7/23/04 8:20:51 PM, > Chinese Medicine writes: > > << IMHO, I agree that our literary tradition, by definition, is not at > > the cutting edge, but I do think it represents the " best part " >> > > Lon: Wouldn't " cutting edge " and " best part " be equivelent? Hi Alon How can the cutting edge exist without the history which got it there? Yes, the cutting edge can, at times, disprove much history creating a paradigm shift. But how to get to the cutting edge? IMHO, the " best part " would be the history which got us here; the history which has cured so many patients of the past. Perhaps the " cutting edge " could be considered indispensible to the future of our medicine but wheather it will ever be the " best part " by definition, remains to be seen. In evolutionary theory, Stephen J. Gould coined the term " punctuated equilibrium " to explain great huge changes that took place due to sudden environmental changes which modified the course of evolution forever; i.e. ice ages, meteor impacts, great flooding etc. which wiped out competeing species which may have previously exhibited superior fitness supporting what was left and able to adapt to new surroundings and conditions. However, these things that were left got to where they were at the time of the catastrophe by way of gradual steady state evolutionary principles-- simple natural selection, gradual changes in environment, competition for resources, principles of fitness, mutation etc. And their future existance relied on these principles between events of punctuated equilibrium. Therefore, I believe one does not operate independent of the other. When you talk about cutting edge and not being that interested in " history " , I sense you gravitating toward an event of punctuated equilibrium. With respect to evolution of life on earth, this is neither good nor bad. Mother Nature has no goals. However, in TCM there are goals as to healing patients. Therefore, I think that acts of punctuated equilibrium, while not out of the question, should be well considered. Exploring the frontiers might be well served by balancing this with touching on history and being very careful before throwing something out. The Chinese of old may have been a little too careful, leaving us with some confusing ideas in order to save the face of their teachers and ancestors. Einstein certainly was an author of a few ideas that created punctuated equilibrium within the scientific community. But his ideas were well-considered and still used the same calculus as the scientists around him. It did, however, take about 40 years for a consensus to be reached throughout the scientific community concerning his theories--which still remain theories to this day. I guess I always advocate for the use of both sides of the brain, integration of past, present and future and the middle path in general--especially when it comes to treating the patient. What do you think? Shanna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.