Digest Number 1052

[Guest guest]

Jim,

 

 

Ken:

 

Can you go into Unschuld's reasoning behind these three? I suspect

it is becuase of German regulations and something to do with

language, but am not sure.

 

Hopefully you'll be able to see when

you read the whole interview that

there were so many fascinating ideas

coming into view that we just didn't

have time to follow up properly on

each of them. I would not want to

speculate as to what Prof. Unschuld

might have to say, as so much of

what he says takes me by surprise

the first time I hear it.

 

From my own point of view, your

speculations seem reasonable; but

I didn't understand the gist of

these three criteria to be intended

as cultuarally specific. No doubt

such influences as language and laws

impact directly on what it means

to be a professional and thus are

responsible for variations from one

society to another in those definitions.

 

As I said in my post yesterday, I

mainly wanted to put it up on the

list because I'd found these particular

remarks so thought provoking, as was

so much of what he had to say. One

afternoon we walked down a mountain

talking about the respective roles

of Daoism and Confucianism in the

early phases of the development of

medical theories and practices in

ancient China. And I think that is

another topic that interests quite

a few folks.

 

I did think of one other point

with respect to Prof. Unschuld's

comment about the primary factor

underlying the contemporary

professionalization of acuupncture,

i.e. the fact that those engaged

in the profession have made up their

own knowledge. And this is a topic

that has come up on the list a number

of times, i.e. making stuff up. I

t certainly applies as much to Chinese

herbal medicine as to acupuncture.

 

It seems to me that, as many have

pointed out on the list, there is

a natural tendency, virtually a

requirement that those engaged in

the practice of acupuncture or Chinese

medicine make up the knowledge that

they apply in the practice of

their profession. And this is confirmed

by Unschuld's first criterion.

 

Where then does there enter in

any basis of the long running debate

about making stuff up? If it's not

simply natural but a downright

criterion of professionalism,

why would anybody haggle over

people making stuff up?

 

There's another point on which I'd

like to have Unschuld's thoughts. As well

as those of others on the list who

have kicked this topic back a forth

a bit over the past couple of years.

 

My own take on it is rooted in

the complementary roles of freedom

and restraint in traditional Chinese

society. Free, even compelled, as we

all are to make our own knowledge up,

still according to Chinese traditional

values, we are bound by a characteristic

set of restraints to make stuff up

according to certain underlying principles,

often implicit...left entirely unstated.

 

When I talk about the need for the

study of language and philosophy

as part of medical education, I

am addressing our need to know the

nature of these bindings.

 

Ken

[Guest guest]

At 05:06 PM 10/30/03, you wrote:

> >And I've never known a true

> >essential oil 'candle'.

 

the ones we offer on our site are made with pure essential oils...we are

the supplier of the oils so we KNOW what's in the soy based candles.

 

 

 

 

 

Your source for superb Essential Oils, Aromatherapy

Accessories, Information, Books and more!

Visit us at: <http://www.naturesgift.com>