Guest guest Posted July 18, 2000 Report Share Posted July 18, 2000 wrote: > > Put well within the easy-to-relate 2,500 words, this claim is a saw with which we > can cut off the branch we are sitting on. > > Thank you Bob Felt for your insight. I could not agree more! Let's not " dumb down " the rich concepts of Chinese medicine. Susannah Neal, MA, L.Ac. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 20, 2000 Report Share Posted July 20, 2000 > How > theoretical these concepts are reflecting dated idees (as many TCM > theories changed with the prevailing popular general principles of > different dynasties), do they have a real clinical bases? Should we except > these just because they are classical writing? The ideas of authenticity and validity have become quite confused in current writing, particularly because the idea of a `clinical translation' has never been put forward with any methodological foundation. However, clinical experience cannot guarantee authenticity and translation cannot guarantee validity. If the archelogical fragments, the surrounding literature of the period in which a text was created support the existence of an idea; if contemporary and subsequent commentaries demonstrate that an idea has had a consistent presence in Chinese medical literature; and, if that idea is translated into a modern language with appropriate scholarly safeguards, we can say that the idea is `authentic,' or `traditional.' Once a traditional idea is rooted in appropriate scholarship, we can believe that it is worthy of clinical consideration, particularly if we find that it has survived from generation to generation in writings meant to transmit clinical information. We cannot say it is clinically valid until we undertake some clinical research that satisfies our chosen criteria (whether that is personal or more formal). I'll not undertake a discussion of clinical validity because the main point in this instance is that scholarship guarantees do not to prove that an idea works, but to demonstrate what is and is not part of the tradition in some consistent way. The reason for scholarship standards is not that they prove something works but that they protect our understanding of the tradition from the grafting on of idiosyncrasies, or the loss of traditional concepts that do not fit or discomfit the present milieu. >Even in this country you > can see how every time a new book comes out, new treatments are suddenly > Why is Japanese acupuncture suddenly so popular were [ . . .] > 15 years ago we were able to " successfully " treat the same disorders using > so called TCM acupuncture? I believe these are the major issues for today > and should be in the mind of any Practitioner writing a book. There are more authentic traditional approaches to treatment than have ever been considered in the English literature and the absence of any practical support for the idea that Chinese medical clinicians should have an understanding of Chinese medical history, Chinese culture or philosophy, has created a situation where a series of ``new'' partial views have come to people's attention. In other words, we have tended to form our impressions of CM based on an inadequate view of the discipline's scope, heterogenaity and complexity. Japanese acupuncture is an excellent example. It is not ``suddenly popular.'' When the first book was issue in 1983, it was dismissed as a sideline to the supposedly-REAL TCM in a process of elimination that also diminished the potential inputs of people like Tin Yao So, Miriam Lee and others who were not part of the newly-introduced TCM movement. Ironically, these were the people who then had the most clinical experience. Thanks to people like Stephen Birch, Kowei Kuwahara, Stephen Brown, Marty Feldman, and others, who continued writing and teaching despite the negative reception, a new generation of clinicians who have a broader view, or who perhaps appreciate the hands-on training style, it is finally getting some attention. You might also ask, What happened to Kampo? Did this Japanese approach to a subset of the traditional formulary become useless? Did the on-going experience of the Japanese prove invalid, or did Kampo just become economically unattactive when license education adopted the available TCM English texts and domestic alcohol-water tinctures arrived to fit the cost/compliance marketplace? bob Paradigm Publications www.paradigm-pubs.com 44 Linden Street Robert L. Felt Brookline MA 02445 617-738-4664 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 20, 2000 Report Share Posted July 20, 2000 , " Robert L. Felt " <bob@p...> wrote: the main point in this instance is that scholarship guarantees do not to prove that an idea works, but to demonstrate what is and is not part of the tradition in some consistent way. And I do not think anyone has argued that because an idea appears in a classical text that it has clinical validity. Sun si miao used a hangman's noose as medicine, I think. This may or may not be clinically valid. But who cares? Hanging has been illegal in the US for decades. This is an example of what Alon refers to as a changing social circumstance which obsoletes a therapy. But we can't even decide whether or how to evaluate this bizarre idea without a full appreciation of those nasty distractions (culture, history, language, etc.). Perhaps the noose was a metaphor or a name of an obscure plant that looked like a noose. However, research show that it was indeed a rope noose used to execute people and thus not worthy of further clinical consideration on my part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 20, 2000 Report Share Posted July 20, 2000 Actually, the translation of the hanging noose I've seen is " hanged man's po " (corporeal soul). My understanding is that something of the spirit of a man who had been hanged went into the rope that hanged him. Whether this was a placebo effect, or if something went 'into' the rope, I couldn't say. However, one could imagine the power of something like this given to a patient. Also, " hanging noose therapy " , in terms of using the five phases to balance conflicting emotions, I believe, also came from Sun Si Miao as well. on 7/20/00 1:54 PM, herb-t at herb-t wrote: > , " Robert L. Felt " <bob@p...> > wrote: > the main point in this instance is that scholarship guarantees do not > to prove that an idea works, but to demonstrate what is and is not > part > of the tradition in some consistent way. > > And I do not think anyone has argued that because an idea appears in > a > classical text that it has clinical validity. Sun si miao used a > hangman's noose as medicine, I think. This may or may not be > clinically valid. But who cares? Hanging has been illegal in the US > for decades. This is an example of what Alon refers to as a changing > social circumstance which obsoletes a therapy. But we can't even > decide whether or how to evaluate this bizarre idea without a full > appreciation of those nasty distractions (culture, history, language, > etc.). Perhaps the noose was a metaphor or a name of an obscure > plant > that looked like a noose. However, research show that it was indeed > a > rope noose used to execute people and thus not worthy of further > clinical consideration on my part. > ------ > BTW: Did you buy that new car yet? > If not, check this site out. > They're called CarsDirect.com and it's a pretty sweet way to buy a car. > http://click./1/6847/11/_/542111/_/964126509/ > ------ > > Chinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare > practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing > in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, > including board approved online continuing education. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 20, 2000 Report Share Posted July 20, 2000 , " " < zrosenberg@e...> wrote: > Actually, the translation of the hanging noose I've seen is " hanged man's > po " (corporeal soul). My understanding is that something of the spirit of a > man who had been hanged went into the rope that hanged him. Whether this > was a placebo effect, or if something went 'into' the rope, I couldn't say. > However, one could imagine the power of something like this given to a > patient. Also, " hanging noose therapy " , in terms of using the five phases > to balance conflicting emotions, I believe, also came from Sun Si Miao as > well. > > Now that's both interesting and useful (and not at all distracting), though still of no clinical importance to me, no matter how powerful it may have been in ancient China. I'm sure the validity of this " therapy " was debated even way back then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 20, 2000 Report Share Posted July 20, 2000 wrote: > Also, " hanging noose therapy " , in terms of using the five phases > to balance conflicting emotions, I believe, also came from Sun Si Miao as > well. Personally, I'm intrigued. The shamanic practice of making death your ally is a means by which a new appreciation for life can be obtained. Knowing that at any moment you could be snatched up from this world never to return again (at least never to return to your present wardrobe) is a real kidney tonic. Metal nourishing water? I wonder if Lotus has any of that hanging noose rope in extract form. -- Al Stone L.Ac. <AlStone http://www.BeyondWellBeing.com Pain is inevitable, suffering is optional. Attachment: vcard [not shown] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 20, 2000 Report Share Posted July 20, 2000 The ideas of authenticity and validity have become quite confused in current writing, particularly because the idea of a `clinical translation' has never been put forward with any methodological foundation. However, clinical experience cannot guarantee authenticity and translation cannot guarantee validity.>>> I Agree.I also think we need to shift sum of the focus and discussion in the west to these issues. A traditional concept is only helpful if one can apply in modern times. I think that keeping with the tradition on OM i.e. constant development is were the process must continue. The body is one and clinical principals ether from OM or modern medicine must relate. If they were not than are we looking at different populations? We should not abandon what makes OM great but we need to understand better how to USE it effectively. All information, regardless of the source, should be integrated to our thinking Alon Marcus - Robert L. Felt Thursday, July 20, 2000 12:05 PM RE: RE: Easy terminology > How> theoretical these concepts are reflecting dated idees (as many TCM> theories changed with the prevailing popular general principles of> different dynasties), do they have a real clinical bases? Should we except> these just because they are classical writing? The ideas of authenticity and validity have become quite confused in current writing, particularly because the idea of a `clinical translation' has never been put forward with any methodological foundation. However, clinical experience cannot guarantee authenticity and translation cannot guarantee validity.If the archelogical fragments, the surrounding literature of the period in which a text was created support the existence of an idea; if contemporary and subsequent commentaries demonstrate that an idea has had a consistent presence in Chinese medical literature; and, if that idea is translated into a modern language with appropriate scholarly safeguards, we can say that the idea is `authentic,' or `traditional.' Once a traditional idea is rooted in appropriate scholarship, we can believe that it is worthy of clinical consideration, particularly if we find that it has survived from generation to generation in writings meant to transmit clinical information.We cannot say it is clinically valid until we undertake some clinical research that satisfies our chosen criteria (whether that is personal or more formal). I'll not undertake a discussion of clinical validity because the main point in this instance is that scholarship guarantees do not to prove that an idea works, but to demonstrate what is and is not part of the tradition in some consistent way.The reason for scholarship standards is not that they prove something works but that they protect our understanding of the tradition from the grafting on of idiosyncrasies, or the loss of traditional concepts that do not fit or discomfit the present milieu.>Even in this country you> can see how every time a new book comes out, new treatments are suddenly> Why is Japanese acupuncture suddenly so popular were[ . . .]> 15 years ago we were able to "successfully" treat the same disorders using> so called TCM acupuncture? I believe these are the major issues for today> and should be in the mind of any Practitioner writing a book.There are more authentic traditional approaches to treatment than have ever been considered in the English literature and the absence of any practical support for the idea that Chinese medical clinicians should have an understanding of Chinese medical history, Chinese culture or philosophy, has created a situation where a series of ``new'' partial views have come to people's attention. In other words, we have tended to form our impressions of CM based on an inadequate view of the discipline's scope, heterogenaity and complexity.Japanese acupuncture is an excellent example. It is not ``suddenly popular.'' When the first book was issue in 1983, it was dismissed as a sideline to the supposedly-REAL TCM in a process of elimination that also diminished the potential inputs of people like Tin Yao So, Miriam Lee and others who were not part of the newly-introduced TCM movement. Ironically, these were the people who then had the most clinical experience. Thanks to people like Stephen Birch, Kowei Kuwahara, Stephen Brown, Marty Feldman, and others, who continued writing and teaching despite the negative reception, a new generation of clinicians who have a broader view, or who perhaps appreciate the hands-on training style, it is finally getting some attention.You might also ask, What happened to Kampo? Did this Japanese approach to a subset of the traditional formulary become useless? Did the on-going experience of the Japanese prove invalid, or did Kampo just become economically unattactive when license education adopted the available TCM English texts and domestic alcohol-water tinctures arrived to fit the cost/compliance marketplace? bob Paradigm Publicationswww.paradigm-pubs.com 44 Linden StreetRobert L. Felt Brookline MA 02445617-738-4664Chinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 20, 2000 Report Share Posted July 20, 2000 Love it Alon - herb-t Thursday, July 20, 2000 1:54 PM Re: Easy terminology , "Robert L. Felt" <bob@p...> wrote:the main point in this instance is that scholarship guarantees do not to prove that an idea works, but to demonstrate what is and is notpart of the tradition in some consistent way.And I do not think anyone has argued that because an idea appears ina classical text that it has clinical validity. Sun si miao used a hangman's noose as medicine, I think. This may or may not be clinically valid. But who cares? Hanging has been illegal in the US for decades. This is an example of what Alon refers to as a changing social circumstance which obsoletes a therapy. But we can't even decide whether or how to evaluate this bizarre idea without a full appreciation of those nasty distractions (culture, history, language, etc.). Perhaps the noose was a metaphor or a name of an obscureplant that looked like a noose. However, research show that it was indeeda rope noose used to execute people and thus not worthy of further clinical consideration on my part.ToddChinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 27, 2000 Report Share Posted July 27, 2000 To underscore and amplify Bob Felt's comments regarding so-called easy terminology... In my own experience, study and training in Chinese medicine bears a strong relationship and resemblance to study and training in martial arts. There is a gong fu to learning both theory and practical techniques. The terminology is a difficult step, even for native Chinese students. How could it possibly become easy for those who do not have a command of Chinese language and thought? If you train in the martial arts with an approach that favors easy drills you will be easily defeated by your opponents. The same can be said about training in medical arts. In fact the burden of training in medical arts is a more onerous one. For if you are defeated in a martial contest, you shed only your own blood. If you fail in medical trials, you risk the blood of those who have placed their faith and their lives in your hands. Mastery of the terminology enables students to move around at will and without confusion in the subject. But it takes time and effort. Beware of the quick and easy approach. Ken Rose Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 27, 2000 Report Share Posted July 27, 2000 , yulong@m... wrote: ime and effort. > > Beware of the quick and easy approach. > > Ken Rose Welcome back, Ken Hopefully china is suiting you well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 27, 2000 Report Share Posted July 27, 2000 Mastery of the terminology enables studentsto move around at will and without confusionin the subject. But it takes time and effort.>>>Yes but it is also the choice of words selected to describe the terms that makes a big difference alon - yulong Thursday, July 27, 2000 6:08 PM Re: RE: RE: Easy terminology To underscore and amplify Bob Felt's commentsregarding so-called easy terminology...In my own experience, study and training inChinese medicine bears a strong relationshipand resemblance to study and training inmartial arts.There is a gong fu to learning both theoryand practical techniques.The terminology is a difficult step, evenfor native Chinese students. How could itpossibly become easy for those who do nothave a command of Chinese language andthought?If you train in the martial arts with anapproach that favors easy drills you willbe easily defeated by your opponents.The same can be said about training inmedical arts. In fact the burden oftraining in medical arts is a more onerousone. For if you are defeated in a martialcontest, you shed only your own blood.If you fail in medical trials, you riskthe blood of those who have placed theirfaith and their lives in your hands.Mastery of the terminology enables studentsto move around at will and without confusionin the subject. But it takes time and effort.Beware of the quick and easy approach.Ken RoseChinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 28, 2000 Report Share Posted July 28, 2000 Welcome back, Ken Hopefully china is suiting you well. Thanks, Todd. I've been traveling for the past month or more so it's been impossible to keep up with the flow of posts. But I wanted to put in my two cents worth on this discussion of terminology, as it's such a vital issue. Ken 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.