Communist destroy CM - [Jason]

[Guest guest]

I don't expect to be able to convince anyone of anything here, i.e. change

others' viewpoints, but just to air out alternative dimensions and

interpretations. We're perhaps playing out that famous analogy of the

blind men groping individual parts of the elephant and mistaking our

partial viewpoints for the whole.

 

Tue, 7 Sep 2004 07:18:31, you (Jason) wrote:

 

>>… I am strictly looking for evidence that TCM somehow eliminated such

issues, and so far in my past searches, posting the question to 3 lists, no

one has given 1 such example. This is quite telling, because I hear all

the time how evil TCM is because it killed the real medicine, it may have,

but I have yet to see any example of such.

 

To help understand your viewpoint, could you cite instances of such

statements you hear so often (evil TCM killed/destroyed the real medicine),

as I have not seen them here, used such language myself, nor find it in the

Unschuld quotation you began with. He (and the other authorities on the

history of (modern) TCM) use terms more like his " select " and " reinterpret " .

 

There's also the problem here that my points refer to detailed information

from the as yet unpublished Kim Taylor PhD thesis ( " The Medicine of

Revolution… " ), and Unschuld's " Was Ist Medizin? " , which is also virtually

unavailable, being only in German.

 

The jist of this material, however, is succinctly, perhaps provocatively,

presented in the final two chapters (6 & 7) of Unschuld's relatively

concise and readable book " " (1). These chapters comprises

40 pages in small format, and relatively free of the footnotes and other

scholarly paraphernalia. Maybe you've already read this. I'd be interested

in how you view it, being a 'historian's' view.

 

I've had trouble accepting some of his viewpoints. Reading the concluding

part of perhaps his most prominent work - Medicine in China: a History of

Ideas - was especially irksome back when I was a student (of TCM). But over

time, I find the historical material worthwhile - somehow the truth makes

one free - and wrestling with other aspects, that I consider biases, has

also been fruitful.

 

 

 

1) Unschuld Paul U, . trans. Wiseman N. Paradigm

Publications, Brookline MA, 1998. ISBN 0-912111-55-0.

[Guest guest]

To help understand your viewpoint, could you cite instances of such

statements you hear so often (evil TCM killed/destroyed the real medicine),

as I have not seen them here, used such language myself, nor find it in the

Unschuld quotation you began with. He (and the other authorities on the

history of (modern) TCM) use terms more like his " select " and " reinterpret " .

 

 

 

[Jason]

 

This has nothing to do with a viewpoint that I hold or don't hold. This is

in no reference to anyone specific on this list or Unshculd! It is only in

refrence to gathering data. The instances I refer to are from my years

involved in TCM communities (primarily schools) - Such statements are thrown

around like you wouldn't believe. And not to point fingers, but many times

from the 5 elementers. (I even think such statements were said way back

when I fiurst joined this list, but I don't care about searching through the

archives.)

 

 

 

As far as your below reference to the yet- unreleased material, I have (as

previously mentioned) not read this and am awaiting it. But I still have

yet to have seen you cite any information from that or others that offers

evidence for what I am looking for. Please, if I missed a post, because I

was having email problems, just point me to your post and I will review it.

Otherwise still looking.

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

-Jason

 

 

 

There's also the problem here that my points refer to detailed information

from the as yet unpublished Kim Taylor PhD thesis ( " The Medicine of

Revolution. " ), and Unschuld's " Was Ist Medizin? " , which is also virtually

unavailable, being only in German.

 

The jist of this material, however, is succinctly, perhaps provocatively,

presented in the final two chapters (6 & 7) of Unschuld's relatively

concise and readable book " " (1). These chapters comprises

40 pages in small format, and relatively free of the footnotes and other

scholarly paraphernalia. Maybe you've already read this. I'd be interested

in how you view it, being a 'historian's' view.

 

I've had trouble accepting some of his viewpoints. Reading the concluding

part of perhaps his most prominent work - Medicine in China: a History of

Ideas - was especially irksome back when I was a student (of TCM). But over

time, I find the historical material worthwhile - somehow the truth makes

one free - and wrestling with other aspects, that I consider biases, has

also been fruitful.

 

 

 

1) Unschuld Paul U, . trans. Wiseman N. Paradigm

Publications, Brookline MA, 1998. ISBN 0-912111-55-0.

 

 

 

 

 

http://babel.altavista.com/

 

 

and adjust

accordingly.

 

If you , it takes a few days for the messages to stop being

delivered.