Guest guest Report post Posted March 12, 2010 I agree, as Steve Jobs said, " the journey is the reward " . .. On Mar 12, 2010, at 7:13 AM, Steven Alpern wrote: > Where is one to find an " unbiased lens " for studying Chinese medicine? I > submit that both modern and western biases are rife in modern Chinese > medicine. Some of us, who are interested in the philosophical considerations > from which the wonderfully rich clinical history of CM arose, have a lot of > work digging through those biases. Of course, we can't know what a Han > Dynasty person was thinking, but that doesn't absolve us from trying. That > is the quest to own classical and historical Chinese medicine; sometimes > communicating with others engaged in their own such quests can help each of > us find our way to deeper truths about the human condition. > > Steve Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine Pacific College of Oriental Medicine San Diego, Ca. 92122 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 12, 2010 Steve, I agree, although, an unbiased lens is a state of mind. One can achieve this by not projecting (like many like to do) and just receive. Of course there will be inherit limitations in any investigation, from factors such as we are just modern day Westerners, our Chinese reading skills are not up to par, or just reling on our information from people who do not even " try " to become unbiased. Sources matter! Again things always get in the way, but many of these factors are not from *blantant* bias e.g. someone trying to prove a point. They are just lack of abilities or lack of adequate data. Even Chinese commentaries have the potential of being bias, however they are put through sometimes centuries of critique and if one reads widely one can see where the debate lies and where there is very little. Making them very important for investigating the past. In the end, one will never know 100% of the truth. But anthropologists, ethnographers, etc spend a great bit of their training learning how to view things as cleanly as possible. This is essential if one wants to look into " their " world. A skill worthwhile adopting. However, if one just wants to create ideas and merge the new age with the ancient or whatever, then who cares, riff riff away, but these are two separate pursuits. Since one can never change their race, living in a modern era etc. one can only focus on being open and free. This is as close becoming unbiased as possible. Thoughts? - On Behalf Of Steven Alpern Friday, March 12, 2010 8:14 AM Re: Re: Ming=destiny? Where is one to find an " unbiased lens " for studying Chinese medicine? I submit that both modern and western biases are rife in modern Chinese medicine. Some of us, who are interested in the philosophical considerations from which the wonderfully rich clinical history of CM arose, have a lot of work digging through those biases. Of course, we can't know what a Han Dynasty person was thinking, but that doesn't absolve us from trying. That is the quest to own classical and historical Chinese medicine; sometimes communicating with others engaged in their own such quests can help each of us find our way to deeper truths about the human condition. Steve 1.1.1/2741 - Release 03/12/10 02:42:00 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 13, 2010 Jason et. al., Of course " an unbiased lens " is the state of mind on achieves by not projecting the limitations of one's personal point of view onto one's perceptions. The real question is how to pursue that. People project point of view as a survival reflex -- much more than because they like to. Indeed, learning how to not project is a huge spiritual challenge. While academic training in such fields of anthropology can help, they do not provide all the tools one needs to study and practice Chinese medicine. How does one focus on being free of bias and open? In the end, I believe this is more of a personal challenge than a purely academic one. Indeed, while academic studies of the history of CM can be helpful, they can also be misleading because of their embedded modern bias which they consider " reasonable. " How can one truly know what CM is and how it works until one practices it? Projection is ubiquitous in human life, unless one has entirely let go of (or transcended) the limitations of personal point of view by becoming enlightened. How many go that far in studying CM? In my search for deeper and more authentic understanding of CM, I've chosen to learn more about the channel distinctions, because they specifically relate to that central function of projection -- both cognitively and energetically. They are a deep topic, and they help me grow more aware of both my own deeply embedded interpretations (which may mislead me) and even more importantly those of my patients (which often lead to their disease manifestations). To Jason: Why do you make general accusatory statements like, " however, if one just wants to create ideas and merge the new age with the ancient or whatever, then who cares, riff riff away, but these are two separate pursuits? " If you have a critique of my work or ideas, please be specific. If not, please avoid such inflammatory statements. Bias comes in many forms, and when there is a lot of heat it can be difficult to see the light. Steve CCMforHealing.com On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 11:48 AM, < > wrote: > > > Steve, > > I agree, although, an unbiased lens is a state of mind. One can achieve > this > by not projecting (like many like to do) and just receive. Of course there > will be inherit limitations in any investigation, from factors such as we > are just modern day Westerners, our Chinese reading skills are not up to > par, or just reling on our information from people who do not even " try " to > become unbiased. Sources matter! Again things always get in the way, but > many of these factors are not from *blantant* bias e.g. someone trying to > prove a point. They are just lack of abilities or lack of adequate data. > > Even Chinese commentaries have the potential of being bias, however they > are > put through sometimes centuries of critique and if one reads widely one can > see where the debate lies and where there is very little. Making them very > important for investigating the past. > > In the end, one will never know 100% of the truth. But anthropologists, > ethnographers, etc spend a great bit of their training learning how to view > things as cleanly as possible. This is essential if one wants to look into > " their " world. A skill worthwhile adopting. > > However, if one just wants to create ideas and merge the new age with the > ancient or whatever, then who cares, riff riff away, but these are two > separate pursuits. > > Since one can never change their race, living in a modern era etc. one can > only focus on being open and free. This is as close becoming unbiased as > possible. > > Thoughts? > > - > > <%40> > [ <%40>\ ] > On Behalf Of Steven Alpern > Friday, March 12, 2010 8:14 AM > <%40> > Re: Re: Ming=destiny? > > > Where is one to find an " unbiased lens " for studying Chinese medicine? I > submit that both modern and western biases are rife in modern Chinese > medicine. Some of us, who are interested in the philosophical > considerations > from which the wonderfully rich clinical history of CM arose, have a lot of > work digging through those biases. Of course, we can't know what a Han > Dynasty person was thinking, but that doesn't absolve us from trying. That > is the quest to own classical and historical Chinese medicine; sometimes > communicating with others engaged in their own such quests can help each of > us find our way to deeper truths about the human condition. > > Steve > > 1.1.1/2741 - Release 03/12/10 02:42:00 > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 13, 2010 Steve, My comment is not directed at you and is not meant to be inflammatory. Simply, if one wants to create something new, great go for it. If one wants to investigate the past with as much accuracy as possible, then great go for it. Simple as that. Nothing personal about your work or anyone else. I just find these two ideas require different tools and one should be clear what is made up and what is not. If something is not " made up " one should be prepared to present data backing up one's interpretations. This is just the academic process I believe in. Others may believe that one can have any interpretation they like, no matter if anyone else agrees, and without the proper tools to really investigate the issue. I personally just do not. - On Behalf Of Steven Alpern To Jason: Why do you make general accusatory statements like, " however, if one just wants to create ideas and merge the new age with the ancient or whatever, then who cares, riff riff away, but these are two separate pursuits? " If you have a critique of my work or ideas, please be specific. If not, please avoid such inflammatory statements. Bias comes in many forms, and when there is a lot of heat it can be difficult to see the light. Steve CCMforHealing.com On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 11:48 AM, < <%40Chinese Medicine> > wrote: > > > Steve, > > I agree, although, an unbiased lens is a state of mind. One can achieve > this > by not projecting (like many like to do) and just receive. Of course there > will be inherit limitations in any investigation, from factors such as we > are just modern day Westerners, our Chinese reading skills are not up to > par, or just reling on our information from people who do not even " try " to > become unbiased. Sources matter! Again things always get in the way, but > many of these factors are not from *blantant* bias e.g. someone trying to > prove a point. They are just lack of abilities or lack of adequate data. > > Even Chinese commentaries have the potential of being bias, however they > are > put through sometimes centuries of critique and if one reads widely one can > see where the debate lies and where there is very little. Making them very > important for investigating the past. > > In the end, one will never know 100% of the truth. But anthropologists, > ethnographers, etc spend a great bit of their training learning how to view > things as cleanly as possible. This is essential if one wants to look into > " their " world. A skill worthwhile adopting. > > However, if one just wants to create ideas and merge the new age with the > ancient or whatever, then who cares, riff riff away, but these are two > separate pursuits. > > Since one can never change their race, living in a modern era etc. one can > only focus on being open and free. This is as close becoming unbiased as > possible. > > Thoughts? > > - > > <%40> <%40> > [ <%40> <%40>] > On Behalf Of Steven Alpern > Friday, March 12, 2010 8:14 AM > <%40> <%40> > Re: Re: Ming=destiny? > > > Where is one to find an " unbiased lens " for studying Chinese medicine? I > submit that both modern and western biases are rife in modern Chinese > medicine. Some of us, who are interested in the philosophical > considerations > from which the wonderfully rich clinical history of CM arose, have a lot of > work digging through those biases. Of course, we can't know what a Han > Dynasty person was thinking, but that doesn't absolve us from trying. That > is the quest to own classical and historical Chinese medicine; sometimes > communicating with others engaged in their own such quests can help each of > us find our way to deeper truths about the human condition. > > Steve > > 1.1.1/2741 - Release 03/12/10 02:42:00 > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 14, 2010 Steve, I am not at all suggesting that studying something like anthropology will give one " all the tools one needs to study and practice Chinese medicine. " Interestingly, yesterday I had a long conversation with a university teacher (linguistic/sinology) and he actually brought this topic up on his own. Quite simply, becoming unbiased is a skill that one can learn and such academic pursuits can aid this. I am not at all suggesting that one can ever be free from bias or that such academic pursuits are all that one needs. Yes, I agree with you, such a pursuit is both personal and academic. -Jason On Behalf Of Steven Alpern How does one focus on being free of bias and open? In the end, I believe this is more of a personal challenge than a purely academic one. Indeed, while academic studies of the history of CM can be helpful, they can also be misleading because of their embedded modern bias which they consider " reasonable. " How can one truly know what CM is and how it works until one practices it? Projection is ubiquitous in human life, unless one has entirely let go of (or transcended) the limitations of personal point of view by becoming enlightened. How many go that far in studying CM? In my search for deeper and more authentic understanding of CM, I've chosen to learn more about the channel distinctions, because they specifically relate to that central function of projection -- both cognitively and energetically. They are a deep topic, and they help me grow more aware of both my own deeply embedded interpretations (which may mislead me) and even more importantly those of my patients (which often lead to their disease manifestations). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
