Guest guest Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 sppdestiny, it's hard for me to avoid the impression that this is becoming about " being right. " Lonny: Actually , it's about having an informed discussion based on facts. You have made some statements about a SD which are patently false and betray a great lack of familiarity with the system. Beyond the system itself, which I'm not specifically attached to (it's new, there are details to work out, there are other compelling interpretations, etc.), the science of studying the hierarchical emergence of value systems as an integral part of the evolution and expression of human consciousness couldn't be more germane to clinical diagnosis at this time in history and to the emergence of integral medicine in general. I am convinced that having an inductive and synthetic functional model based on the same scientific premise as Chinese medicine to qualify a patient's value system in the context of their culture represents a huge upgrade to CM. It's only natural that over time CM will evolve as a living medicine. I'm suggesting that, in the developed world, SD is as significant an expansion of CM as the Shang Han Lun was in it's time. It is fair enough for people to disagree with that assessment but not casually by one who doesn't really understand the system specifically, or the scientific perspective underlying it. I have written an entire chapter on SD in a text that has sold 5000 copies and is used at many schools as an elective or core text. That means that SD has entered CM. Time will tell if it, or the general view has enduring value. I am more than happy to discuss SD, or anything, based on the merits but I wont let anyone casually dismiss my teachings out of hand. That's an important part of taking a stand for the emergence of a Physician-Scholar tradition in our medicine that has integrity. Regards, Lonny Jarrett Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 sppdestiny, it's hard for me to avoid the impression that this is becoming about " being right. " Lonny: Actually , it's about having an informed discussion based on facts. You have made some statements about a SD which are patently false and betray a great lack of familiarity with the system. Beyond the system itself, which I'm not specifically attached to (it's new, there are details to work out, there are other compelling interpretations, etc.), the science of studying the hierarchical emergence of value systems as an integral part of the evolution and expression of human consciousness couldn't be more germane to clinical diagnosis at this time in history and to the emergence of integral medicine in general. I am convinced that having an inductive and synthetic functional model based on the same scientific premise as Chinese medicine to qualify a patient's value system in the context of their culture represents a huge upgrade to CM. It's only natural that over time CM will evolve as a living medicine. I'm suggesting that, in the developed world, SD is as significant an expansion of CM as the Shang Han Lun was in it's time. It is fair enough for people to disagree with that assessment but not casually by one who doesn't really understand the system specifically, or the scientific perspective underlying it. I have written an entire chapter on SD in a text that has sold 5000 copies and is used at many schools as an elective or core text. That means that SD has entered CM. Time will tell if it, or the general view has enduring value. I am more than happy to discuss SD, or anything, based on the merits but I wont let anyone casually dismiss my teachings out of hand. That's an important part of taking a stand for a true Physician-Scholar tradition that has integrity. Regards, Lonny Jarrett Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 > There's definitely benefit in evidence-based medicine, > but if everything was based on what we can prove at this very moment, > with our limited testing material and perspective, > would Asian medicine have a leg to stand on? K MT: " Evidence based " medicine always makes me laugh. Scientific knowledge is not possible. In fact, it is a contradiction in terms. Sorry if I'm jumping in on the middle of something. I'm new. Mercurius Trismegistus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 > A. Spiral dynamics is substantiated by great amount of empirical > research over the last 50 years. MT: What's Spiral Dynamics, if I may ask? And why are we to believe that it's " cutting edge? " Mercurius Trismegistus 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.