Reading (was Shaoyang)

[Guest guest]

Chace continues (p.13) to say that " Indeed, the only reality the

channel divergences are likely to have is as a tool for guiding

therapy. Therefore, our discussion focuses on the potential clinical

implications of the various interpretations of the text. " The first

fifty pages or so are about theory; most of the book is about Miki

Shima's approach to using divergent meridians (he is a coauthor).

 

Chace is arguably one of the finest writers on Chinese medicine. His

writing style is articulate and intelligent. Where most other

authors simply paraphrase the literature, in Chace you can read the

care and concern he gives to this topic as he weighs the alternative

interpretations. He goes to great lengths to sift through the

existing literature and opinions.

 

Unfortunately, the literature itself, no matter how you translate

it, is unclear and result in a number of conflicting opinions. Like

many other topics in the classical Chinese literature, the ideas are

never fully developed. I would have imagined that energetic flow and

connection would be an important topic for acupuncture; perhaps the

Chinese did not.

 

So, clinical application is the only real litmus test of whose

interpretation is correct or effective.

 

 

Jim Ramholz

 

 

 

, " ALON MARCUS " <alonmarcus@w...>

wrote:

> His criteria of " most effectively applied "

> >>>>can you elaborate

> Alon

> -

> James Ramholz

>

> Thursday, November 22, 2001 10:54 PM

> Reading (was Re: Shaoyang)

>

>

> Alon:

>

> That's certainly a brave assumption. I wish it were true. Chip

> Chace's new book on divergent meridians, among others,

illustrates

> that much of Chinese medicine doesn't make strict sense---at

least

> their literary discussions don't always. Chip remarks that " the

true

> meaning of the text will be ultimately determined by the manner

in

> which it is most effectively applied and not by sifting through

> linguistic minutiae. " He was specifically talking about the Ling

> Shu's treatment of divergent meridians; but, I think there is

enough

> literature in translation to show us that the problem is

frequently

> confronted.

>

> His criteria of " most effectively applied " is one that I have

always

> agreed with and have tried to promote.

>

> Jim Ramholz

>

>

>

>

>

> " Alon Marcus " <alonmarcus@w...> wrote:

> I start by assuming that the original made sense, and therefore

so

> should the translation. I may be wrong at that though

> > Alon

>

>

>

>

>

>