reductionism as the short longer road to knowledge

[Guest guest]

 I didn't even remember that I wrote that, but I must confess in my defense

that I am a creature of habit and am influenced by my environment.  When I hear

the same terminology from Chinese and Korean scholars (whose English is not that

strong)  over and over again, I become complacent, particularly when that's the

only Chinese medical language they understand.  They read the original texts and

teach in an oversimplified manner, lumping all terminology which

represents diminishing any kind of repletion into the term " reduce, "   and 

terminology which  represents an action which treats a vacous state as

" tonify. "   Nonetheless, I consider this sloppiness to be worth the price, as the

quality of information I am acquiring, though not pristine nor without flaw, is

still on a very satisfying level. 

 

I acknowledge that directing Qi through the channels certainly has nothing to do

with sedating , unless, perhaps, one considers a formerly racing, wiry pulse,

which after acupuncture loses its wirey edginess, to be sedating. This is

clearly draining, but based upon the previous  reductionism it is easy to

understand how draining could have become confused with sedating. 

 

But again, that is where it is important to consider one's English words

carefully, including roots.  This entire conversation is about communication,

and if the ideas conveyed are clearly understandable, specific and acurate in

all cases, then the job has been done.  But, based on this, though

hypothetically, one could say that draining and sedating are both  reducing,

then one might assume that they are interchangeable, which, of course, they are

not, and that can lead to error. 

 

But remember, in the passage I used the term reduce, and not Xie, in that

context and with that categorical understanding. 

 

I hope to write with more specificity, but would expect the same from others. 

Again, I find it very unsatisfying that the usage of medical chinese terms seem

to be more for style than conveying specific medical information, like the

differences between an and ping, which still have not been explained to my

satisfaction.   I'm sure if one wanted to, he could come up with scores of other

unclear Chinese medical terms whose distinctions are fuzzy at best.  But I would

be willing to wager, that by engaging in research, one would be able to see

clearly that the terms using, the actions, and  the herbs should  demonstrate a

distinction.  Hopefully within the near future, we will be able to determine

this specificity, and stop, once and for all, the use of indefinite language

and meaning.  Again I am not interested in definitions or translations, I am

interested in learning how the functions, actions and herbs of herbs contribute

to our

understanding of the Chinese language.

 

I want to close by sharing with you a story from the Gemara (Eruvin).  A sage

traveling to the city came to a crossroad and didn't know how to proceed.  He

asked a young child who happened to be standing there which way to go.  The

child asked him, do you want the short longer way or the long shorter way.  He

chose the short longer way.  The path that the child directed him to seemed to

take him right to the city.  Until all of a sudden, his path was completely

blocked by gardens and orchards and he couldn't proceed.  When he came back to

the crossroad, the child was still there and he complained that he was misled,

that that road was not short at all!  The child answered him, " but I told you

that that was the short longer way (appearing to be short but really much

longer,) and you chose it. 

 

Truly in life, we need to always choose the long-shorter road.  We will be

richer, more informed, able to communicate better, and ultimately more whole.

 

 

I look forward to that time of greater specificity and clarity soon.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

--- On Mon, 5/11/09, <zrosenbe wrote:

 

 

<zrosenbe

Re: What is sedation?

Chinese Medicine

Monday, May 11, 2009, 10:10 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yehuda,

This is the post I was responding to:

 

" I don't think that it's a question of points being mechanical. On

the contrary, I think that it's important to always remember that

points are not nearly as important as channels. When we address a

given imbalance, I think that the most important thing we need to do

is look at the channels most affected, and most affecting, sedate one

and tonify the other. Also to palpate, look and feel for tenderness,

spasm, skin crease, lack of symmetry and weakness. In my patients

case, I sedated liver and tonified spleen and Dai, among other things "

 

> Clearly here you are speaking about acupuncture and channels, not

> the liver viscus. This is what I was originally responding to you

> about.

 

 

On May 11, 2009, at 9:05 PM, yehuda frischman wrote:

 

> Z'ev, aren't you reading my posts? This will be the 4th time that I

> am saying that I never considered sedate to be synonymous or even

> proximating Xie. BTW, I also don't think that it is correct to

> equate drain and reduce, in all cases. Reduction implies a

> lessening or diminishing and comes from the Middle English and Latin

> words reducen and reducere which mean to lead back, and though

> draining is reducing, reducing is not necessarily draining.

 

 

Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine

Pacific College of Oriental Medicine

San Diego, Ca. 92122

 

 

[Guest guest]

Interesting. I do think that some of the different terms are used for literary

purposes. You mention " an " and " ping " , unclear on the differences. Me neither.

In fact, " ping an " means peace and I doubt going into the etymological meaning

of the characters would solve the issue, as meanings of terms evolves with time.

For example, understanding that " a woman in the house " is definition of " an "

won't do much for understanding " an shen " ... unless, of course, absence of woman

in the house is the source of one's shen disturbance. It may come down to

nothing more complicated than you " an " the " shen " and " ping " the " wei " , because

that's what you do. Nothing more.

 

We might need to consider to some extent the idiosyncrasies of language, which

is a live and often irrational tool for creating meaning. Consider, for

instance, the English use of the words " make " versus " do " . HL Meinken will do

this discussion far more service than I.

 

y.c.