reply to Jonah

[Guest guest]

I am most interested in Wilber's ideas about the eyes of flesh, etc.

and the tendency of most new age philosophies to collapse the universe

in a one dimensional plane and not recognize these distinctions. Much

else of his personal work is of little interest to me and I have not

anything by him in many years now. I did recently refer to him in his

role as editor of a book called Transformations of Consciousness in

which some of his ideas are put to practical tests in the

psychotherapeutic realm. However that book is largely written by

others (actual psychologists).

 

Anyway, I think much of CM currently exists in the domain of the mind's

eye, rather than the eye of the flesh as Wilber puts it. In other

words, the original empiricism from which CM, like all traditional

medicines, arose has been obscured over time by doctrine and

convention. I want to see the ideas of CM grounded again in the flesh

from whence I assume they sprang. This involves at least two things

for me. First, an accurate transmission of the source material for

study. This requires translation standards, etc. as has been discussed

here at length in the past. Second,it requires assessment of the

information from a variety of angles, including literary,

epidemiological, anthropological, sociological, political, historical

and last but certainly not least, clinical research (including double

blind and outcome).

 

As for blind faith, that is a simple matter to me. I elevate science

and reason above all else because it has served me better than all

else. It is also a universal language that cuts across culture and

economics and politics in shaping decisionmaking. I do nit expect that

to change. Many things in CM could be easily " proven " on this level.

But others might fall by the wayside. Some seem to fear what might be

lost if CM is viewed through such a filter. I fear much more will be

lost if we do not.

 

Ironically, I prefer to think of myself as a free thinker because I

challenge CM doctrines and conventions and I even credit Wilber with

helping to free me from all kinds of dogma to which I was once bound.

However, I had not realized in using his posturing to try and elicit a

similar response from others, I come off as the proponent of just

another dogma. Thanks for the heads-up. :-) Regrettably my ten

millionth smily. Oh darn. Now I need another one. :-)

 

 

Chinese Herbs

 

 

FAX: