Guest guest Posted July 20, 2004 Report Share Posted July 20, 2004 Jason, So, if I'm reading what you wrote correctly, you are saying that the end justifies the means? The end.. somehow righting the perceived wrongs in the profession.. the lack of basic theory knowledge, etc... justifies " lashing " at people. They deserve this? This you think will somehow lead them to a greater desire to read the classics so as not to be tounge lashed by you on this forum? Forgive me, but that seems a very exhausting and questionably effective way to accomplish your goals. Does it really help our profession to turn this forum into a place people are scared to venture for fear of being called ignorant? My experience has been that a gentle hand ultimately affects more change than a hard one. But as always, to each their own. I feel confident in saying that none of us are perfect beings. Sometimes we are mistaken, other times we have a different point of view that we neglect to support adequately. Often times we come from different schools of thought, different teachers, different experiences, different depths of knowledge on various subjects. In my experience, the first step to healing whether it be yourself or others, is compassion... for differences.. for weakness.. And to everyone, I don't know about everyone else, but I have felt the tone of the group change as well. I am all for spirited discussions, differing points of view, disagreements.. fantastic! this is a forum for discourse.. but i think discourse is hindered by condescending posts that attack the person behind the thoughts. I had gotten to the point where I didn't want to post anymore for fear of being attacked. I respect anyone on here for having the courage and kindness to take the time to share their experience and their precious thoughts.. even if they differ from mine or I can't make sense of them. I certainly don't consider myself an expert and believe that I'll still be learning more about this amazing medicine when I'm well into my old age. I'm of the opinion that you never know what you might learn if you open your ears and your heart.. and you may be surprised from whom or what you learn it.. a child, a student, a pet? :> My favorite story that comes to mind is this... Many years back, the Dalai Lama visited Boulder, CO (maybe some of you remember?).. where I grew up. A good friend of mine went to see him speak, and had the honor of talking with him personally. In the midst of this conversation, a reporter came up to take a picture for the Daily Camera, and my friend.. having no idea the disrespect he was conferring, rubbed the Dalai Lama's head affectionately (a gesture, I'm told, that would only be acceptable from a father to young son.. teacher to student).. there was a collective gasp among those watching.. but the Dalai Lama laughed and went right with it.. and thus there in the paper, on the front page, was a picture of my friend rubbing the Dalai Lama's head, both with a look of pure joy and laughter on their faces, and the Dalai Lama in a position of son or student to a 16 year old American boy. >Well… I do have to apologize about my tone, this is though left over >from the obvious ignorance of basic theory, when you (shanna) and I >had a convo on the CHA. I just got frustrated with people making >blatantly wrong statements, and acting like they know something. I am in agreement with you that making a blatantly wrong statement and purporting that it is true is offputting.. but.. IT >was clear here that Dr. K (as he admitted) did not know anything, yet Did he admit he didn't know anything? Or that he had more to learn. (I think like all of us..?) >such black and white statements came up and they were defended… In >your case you were making up more crap than I could shovel out of my >computer. (no offense, just the truth) when someone says stuff like " I Is that necessary? Do you really expect no offense when you put it that way? >(along with CM physicians for thousands of years before us) said chai >hu enters the SJ... " This shows you are talking out of your butt, as >with about 80% of your statements.. You have no idea, and this is what >pisses me off about the profession. There is a basic amount of theory You seem to have a lot of anger. You're passionate.. how wonderful! We need more passionate people engaged in this profession.. but being pissed off is only the first step. The second is using that passion to affect the ends you so desire.. I'm only saying that berating and attacking may not be the most effective way to achieve the ends that I think most of us dream of. >that everyone should know, unfortunately the people that don't know it >just start MSUing (Making Stuff up)… Saying oh, Chinese medicine is >creative I can expand the theory anyway that my mind likes etc… This >is something that everyone should think about, because it is endemic >in the US, because people don't have a firm grounding and feel it is >there right to MSU… >BTW- Channels of herbs were created in the Qing dynasty, and chai hu >by most sources does not go to the SJ, and only very few sources >assign it to the SJ and this is because of the GB link, no by clearing >the 3 burners, and yes I have a source. But I don't understand.. you just said that Shanna was making things up by saying it went to the SJ when you said yourself that certain sources do assign it to the SJ. Your objection is to her saying that for many thousands of years CM practitioners have been saying this? Maybe you disagree with those sources, but is she really " taking it out of her butt " ? And re: Disregarding CAM... I don't know many practioners who look at CAM as a brilliant book on the subject of TCM, but nonetheless it remains a state board required book in the state of California and a book thus, most students are required to learn a large part of their TCM theory from. Can you begrudge us looking to a book that many schools and board exams feel is useful enough to require? Perhaps you can enlighten us to more indepth theories, but looking down on someone for using or quoting from this book seems unjust. Kind Regards and Much Respect, Nadia _______________ MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web page – FREE download! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200413ave/direct/01/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 21, 2004 Report Share Posted July 21, 2004 I respect Jason's rigour and desire to raise the bar in terms of TCM education. However, his opinions have always been condescending in tone and application since he was a student and questioned the validity of " yin fire " on CHA. Ironically, he now promotes his own paper on the subject. Jason simply does not believe anyone unless he heard it first hand, thought it first or read it himself. Despite what his tone and self importance may indicate; he is not as experienced as many on this list he berates and abuses.........ironic to say the least. In the end, no one listens to what such individuals have to say and may even view rigour as representing such arrogance and disrespect for those who have the heart to heal. This results is the opposite effect of what he proposes to create. Best Wishes, Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 21, 2004 Report Share Posted July 21, 2004 Really? The Dalai Lama is considered a head of state by the U.S., and ,as such, is afforded Secret Service protection. I'm shocked they'd let someone come up to him and rub his head like the genie in the lamp. Is this story true? John Garbarini --- East Dakota <eastdakota wrote: > > Jason, > > So, if I'm reading what you wrote correctly, you are > saying that the end > justifies the means? The end.. somehow righting the > perceived wrongs in the > profession.. the lack of basic theory knowledge, > etc... justifies " lashing " > at people. They deserve this? This you think will > somehow lead them to a > greater desire to read the classics so as not to be > tounge lashed by you on > this forum? Forgive me, but that seems a very > exhausting and questionably > effective way to accomplish your goals. Does it > really help our profession > to turn this forum into a place people are scared to > venture for fear of > being called ignorant? > > My experience has been that a gentle hand ultimately > affects more change > than a hard one. But as always, to each their own. > > I feel confident in saying that none of us are > perfect beings. Sometimes we > are mistaken, other times we have a different point > of view that we neglect > to support adequately. Often times we come from > different schools of > thought, different teachers, different experiences, > different depths of > knowledge on various subjects. In my experience, the > first step to healing > whether it be yourself or others, is compassion... > for differences.. for > weakness.. > > > And to everyone, > > I don't know about everyone else, but I have felt > the tone of the group > change as well. I am all for spirited discussions, > differing points of view, > disagreements.. fantastic! this is a forum for > discourse.. but i think > discourse is hindered by condescending posts that > attack the person behind > the thoughts. I had gotten to the point where I > didn't want to post anymore > for fear of being attacked. > > I respect anyone on here for having the courage and > kindness to take the > time to share their experience and their precious > thoughts.. even if they > differ from mine or I can't make sense of them. I > certainly don't consider > myself an expert and believe that I'll still be > learning more about this > amazing medicine when I'm well into my old age. I'm > of the opinion that you > never know what you might learn if you open your > ears and your heart.. and > you may be surprised from whom or what you learn > it.. a child, a student, a > pet? :> > > My favorite story that comes to mind is this... Many > years back, the Dalai > Lama visited Boulder, CO (maybe some of you > remember?).. where I grew up. A > good friend of mine went to see him speak, and had > the honor of talking with > him personally. In the midst of this conversation, a > reporter came up to > take a picture for the Daily Camera, and my friend.. > having no idea the > disrespect he was conferring, rubbed the Dalai > Lama's head affectionately (a > gesture, I'm told, that would only be acceptable > from a father to young > son.. teacher to student).. there was a collective > gasp among those > watching.. but the Dalai Lama laughed and went right > with it.. and thus > there in the paper, on the front page, was a picture > of my friend rubbing > the Dalai Lama's head, both with a look of pure joy > and laughter on their > faces, and the Dalai Lama in a position of son or > student to a 16 year old > American boy. > > >Well… I do have to apologize about my tone, this is > though left over > >from the obvious ignorance of basic theory, when > you (shanna) and I > >had a convo on the CHA. I just got frustrated with > people making > >blatantly wrong statements, and acting like they > know something. > > I am in agreement with you that making a blatantly > wrong statement and > purporting that it is true is offputting.. > > but.. > > IT > >was clear here that Dr. K (as he admitted) did not > know anything, yet > > Did he admit he didn't know anything? Or that he had > more to learn. (I think > like all of us..?) > > > >such black and white statements came up and they > were defended… In > >your case you were making up more crap than I could > shovel out of my > >computer. (no offense, just the truth) when someone > says stuff like " I > > Is that necessary? Do you really expect no offense > when you put it that way? > > > >(along with CM physicians for thousands of years > before us) said chai > >hu enters the SJ... " This shows you are talking > out of your butt, as > >with about 80% of your statements.. You have no > idea, and this is what > >pisses me off about the profession. There is a > basic amount of theory > > You seem to have a lot of anger. You're passionate.. > how wonderful! We need > more passionate people engaged in this profession.. > but being pissed off is > only the first step. The second is using that > passion to affect the ends you > so desire.. I'm only saying that berating and > attacking may not be the most > effective way to achieve the ends that I think most > of us dream of. > > > >that everyone should know, unfortunately the people > that don't know it > >just start MSUing (Making Stuff up)… Saying oh, > Chinese medicine is > >creative I can expand the theory anyway that my > mind likes etc… This > >is something that everyone should think about, > because it is endemic > >in the US, because people don't have a firm > grounding and feel it is > >there right to MSU… > >BTW- Channels of herbs were created in the Qing > dynasty, and chai hu > >by most sources does not go to the SJ, and only > very few sources > >assign it to the SJ and this is because of the GB > link, no by clearing > >the 3 burners, and yes I have a source. > > But I don't understand.. you just said that Shanna > was making things up by > saying it went to the SJ when you said yourself that > certain sources do > assign it to the SJ. Your objection is to her saying > that for many thousands > of years CM practitioners have been saying this? > Maybe you disagree with > those sources, but is she really " taking it out of > her butt " ? > > And re: Disregarding CAM... I don't know many > practioners who look at CAM as > a brilliant book on the subject of TCM, but > nonetheless it remains a state > board required book in the state of California and a > book thus, most > students are required to learn a large part of their > TCM theory from. Can > you begrudge us looking to a book that many schools > and board exams feel is > useful enough to require? Perhaps you can enlighten > us to more indepth > theories, but looking down on someone for using or > quoting from this book > seems unjust. > > Kind Regards and Much Respect, > > Nadia > === message truncated === Mail is new and improved - Check it out! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 21, 2004 Report Share Posted July 21, 2004 These are some good thoughts so I will respond... Chinese Medicine , " East Dakota " <eastdakota@h...> wrote: > My experience has been that a gentle hand ultimately affects more change > than a hard one. But as always, to each their own. Everyone has there way… > > I feel confident in saying that none of us are perfect beings. Sometimes we > are mistaken, other times we have a different point of view that we neglect > to support adequately. Often times we come from different schools of > thought, different teachers, different experiences, different depths of > knowledge on various subjects. In my experience, the first step to healing > whether it be yourself or others, is compassion... for differences.. for > weakness.. > > > >Well… I do have to apologize about my tone, this is though left over > >from the obvious ignorance of basic theory, when you (shanna) and I > >had a convo on the CHA. I just got frustrated with people making > >blatantly wrong statements, and acting like they know something. > > I am in agreement with you that making a blatantly wrong statement and > purporting that it is true is offputting.. > > but.. > > IT > >was clear here that Dr. K (as he admitted) did not know anything, yet > > Did he admit he didn't know anything? Or that he had more to learn. (I think > like all of us..?) > > > >such black and white statements came up and they were defended… In > >your case you were making up more crap than I could shovel out of my > >computer. (no offense, just the truth) when someone says stuff like " I > > Is that necessary? Do you really expect no offense when you put it that way? > > > >(along with CM physicians for thousands of years before us) said chai > >hu enters the SJ... " This shows you are talking out of your butt, as > >with about 80% of your statements.. You have no idea, and this is what > >pisses me off about the profession. There is a basic amount of theory > > You seem to have a lot of anger. You're passionate.. how wonderful! We need > more passionate people engaged in this profession.. but being pissed off is > only the first step. The second is using that passion to affect the ends you > so desire.. I'm only saying that berating and attacking may not be the most > effective way to achieve the ends that I think most of us dream of. `Anger' may be a bit strong, but passionate yes… Disappointed in the rigor of our profession - YES… People have quoted, the true teacher is to be quite, you have to be nice blah blah blah… IMO, sometimes shaking things up a bit, gets to some real truth, and makes people really think about the issues. Just look at all this dialog and emotion etc that has surfaced from so many people… Like I said everyone has there way… If I said nothing, and everyone just tippy toed around Dr K's statements then nothing would have happened, but I bet everyone is thinking twice about where there information comes from… Proboboyl even Dr K… But I could be wrong… But something in this case is better than nothing (which – no one else said anything…) > > > But I don't understand.. you just said that Shanna was making things up by > saying it went to the SJ when you said yourself that certain sources do > assign it to the SJ. Your objection is to her saying that for many thousands > of years CM practitioners have been saying this? Maybe you disagree with > those sources, but is she really " taking it out of her butt " ? Well… I think the whole context of the discussion is needed, and I shouldn't have pulled out just the sentences. Not to bring up a name (because that is mean), but this person was completely making up theories to prove a point, it was not about training, but creative thinking… This in her mind was alright, but in most people's a major disservice to the medicine, and just represents false thinking (this topic I would love to discuss, not her, but the idea of creative thinking in theory, i.e. what is allowed etc. – this is the heart of the issue)… As far as the SJ statement, there was no source she had, she just was throwing a statement like that, to matter of factly state that she was right. This statement has no source. IF so I would like to see it. She never quoted 1 source. So the butt comment was in general, and that quote is a false statement, IMO. (One would have to read the whole discussion to appreciate the butt part, it was more about the theory.) According to Andy Ellis in his Chai Hu monologue he states that this SJ idea (if someone has it they can double check, because mine is not around at the moment) and channel idea for chai hu came about in the Qing Dynasty. So now we a place for dialogue on this issue.. I have a source that says one thing, let us see a source for shanna's statement that says that this idea is 1000's of years old. > > And re: Disregarding CAM... I don't know many practioners who look at CAM as > a brilliant book on the subject of TCM, but nonetheless it remains a state > board required book in the state of California and a book thus, most > students are required to learn a large part of their TCM theory from. Can > you begrudge us looking to a book that many schools and board exams feel is > useful enough to require? Perhaps you can enlighten us to more indepth > theories, but looking down on someone for using or quoting from this book > seems unjust. ** I think this comes back full circle of why this whole firestorm started! In the very 1st post when Dr K wrote his initial bizarro statements, I pointed him to 3 sources that are much more evolved than CAM, and what was the response? I don't want to read books, just tell me what personal experience people have… Clearly, with his later posts, his ideas did not change, he did not have any desire to read and understand the more broader viewpoint, therefore choosing to live in his world and proclaim his initial statements. I gave him my experience (saying it is not so – which of course he ignored, as well as the books).. If you don't see a problem with this, then I will elaborate. As far as CAM – Board exams are meaningless, as we all know. This book is known for its simplistic mindset, and is plagued with errors. This is TCM 101, if that is as far as one has gotten then this is a tragedy. I know no one has stopped there. This book is clearly outdated! I don't think I have ever looked down on anyone for quoted CAM, that is the truth. There are only 2 issues that I have lashed at. 1) making stuff up and not admitting it while also not quoting a source. 2) and at the same time when sources were offered, disregarding them… I highly encourage people to bring other theories to the table, but it is only intelligent and smart for the profession, to know where they came from… Finally, this whole debate is nothing to do with allowing for different viewpoints. It is more like: When someone has the phobia and belief that if they walk out in the rain, they will melt (use moxa with phlegm, or phlegm always = hot). This is their world. It is reality and truth to them. But everyday from their window they see 100's of people walking outside in the rain and surviving. They can believe that they are different, and stick to their world, or say hey, there are all these other people doing it (moxing phlegm, or phlegm can be cold) and nothing is happening. We do not fault the belief. This is fine. What I fault is writing into to the newspaper how one may die if they walk in the rain, scarring others into their belief. This is a interesting example (afraid to moxa phlegm) because there are many black and whites taught (can't moxa heat) etc… This also has many parallels to religion. In one's own world things make sense, when one starts studying other systems, (cultures in the case of religion) one can realize that there belief was just false, it is a widening perspective. So we can accept where people are at, which I of course do, but do we have to accept we people purport statements that are contradictory to other systems as a truth? - > > Kind Regards and Much Respect, > > Nadia > > _______________ > MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web page – FREE > download! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200413ave/direct/01/ 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.