Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

paradigm shift

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

I desire to see a paradigm shift in medicine. but my reading of Kuhn

suggests unequivocally that paradigms only shift when a series of experiments

pushes the limits of the prevailing paradigm and discloses data that cannot

be accommodated by that old paradigm. Merely practicing our craft

does not accomplish this goal. We must first test our methods against

the prevailing paradigm, which involves using accepted objective lab tests

to verify our results. In a study like the one that has been approved

at OCOM, this will accomplish 2 things. We will prove the efficacy

of chinese medicine on its own terms, as this study uses TCM differential

dx. However, the fact the the TCM method works will push science

towards a new paradigm that has to accommodate the value of differential

dx as we do it. But it is not likely that TCM will become the new

paradigm itself; it will merely provide impetus towards a new paradigm

that we cannot yet foresee. As for the use of modern diagnostics,

I support the use of standard tests like ultrasound, bloodwork, etc.

I have no interest in gadgets that do TCM dx as described in the article

about Taiwan. Those who will play no role in this development are

those who adhere completely to traditional methods and eschew modern science

altogether. That is not how paradigms shift. we engage them

on their own terms and show them how their view of the universe is limited

and how it can be expanded by looking at ours. This does nothing

to rend the fabric of TCM as long as we always set up experiments to challenge

the existing paradigm. On the other hand, those who set up allopathic

type experiments that use one herb formula regardless of TCM pattern are

working against the paradigm shift and should not be supported. The

fact that NIH approved OCOM means that all future proposals should be set

up this way. there is now no reason to do otherwise.

 

-- ,

 

 

FAX:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A paradigm shift is inevitable. In the West, the paradigm shift

involves Complexity Theory. Although there is already much

deliniation of that theory, it doesn't seem to affect the practice

of Western medicine except at the fringes.

 

CM is changing simply because it is in America and interacting with

Western medicine. It will participate in the paradigm shift because

its theories are sometimes said to be a paraphrase of Complexity

Theory (by myself and others). It is especially, I think, when we

describe 5-Phases as a self-organizing system, and use 3-depths in

pulses to follow the interaction between emotional, functional, and

structurative aspects of the body.

 

Jim Ramholz

 

 

 

 

, wrote:

> I desire to see a paradigm shift in medicine. but my reading of

Kuhn

> suggests unequivocally that paradigms only shift when a series of

> experiments pushes the limits of the prevailing paradigm and

discloses

> data that cannot be accommodated by that old paradigm. Merely

> practicing our craft does not accomplish this goal. We must first

test

> our methods against the prevailing paradigm, which involves using

> accepted objective lab tests to verify our results. In a study

like the

> one that has been approved at OCOM, this will accomplish 2

things. We

> will prove the efficacy of chinese medicine on its own terms, as

this

> study uses TCM differential dx. However, the fact the the TCM

method

> works will push science towards a new paradigm that has to

accommodate

> the value of differential dx as we do it. But it is not likely

that TCM

> will become the new paradigm itself; it will merely provide impetus

> towards a new paradigm that we cannot yet foresee. As for the use

of

> modern diagnostics, I support the use of standard tests like

ultrasound,

> bloodwork, etc. I have no interest in gadgets that do TCM dx as

> described in the article about Taiwan. Those who will play no

role in

> this development are those who adhere completely to traditional

methods

> and eschew modern science altogether. That is not how paradigms

shift.

> we engage them on their own terms and show them how their view of

the

> universe is limited and how it can be expanded by looking at

ours. This

> does nothing to rend the fabric of TCM as long as we always set up

> experiments to challenge the existing paradigm. On the other hand,

> those who set up allopathic type experiments that use one herb

formula

> regardless of TCM pattern are working against the paradigm shift

and

> should not be supported. The fact that NIH approved OCOM means

that all

> future proposals should be set up this way. there is now no

reason to

> do otherwise.

>

>

> --

> Chinese Herbs

>

> FAX:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Sunday, November 25, 2001, at 11:48 AM, James Ramholz wrote:

 

> A paradigm shift is inevitable. In the West, the paradigm shift

> involves Complexity Theory. Although there is already much

> deliniation of that theory, it doesn't seem to affect the practice

> of Western medicine except at the fringes.

 

(Z'ev) I agree. While there are many enthusiastic researchers and

physicians, the biomedical and especially the pharmaceutical world as

entities are very conservative and not that open to change in my

experience (lecturing at medical schools and research institutes,

reading the medical literature). The Santa Fe Institute is one small

island that has done some research on immunology from a complexity

orientation, and the data is very interesting.

 

>

> CM is changing simply because it is in America and interacting with

> Western medicine. It will participate in the paradigm shift because

> its theories are sometimes said to be a paraphrase of Complexity

> Theory (by myself and others). It is especially, I think, when we

> describe 5-Phases as a self-organizing system, and use 3-depths in

> pulses to follow the interaction between emotional, functional, and

> structurative aspects of the body.

>

> (Z'ev) There is no doubt that holography, chronobiology, fractals and

> complexity theory can elucidate on Chinese medical theory in ways that

> biomedical science cannot. The Chinese are on to this as well. . .

> .see the very interesting " Book of Changes and Traditional Chinese

> Medicine " by Yang Li, Beijing Science and Technology Press (both

> Chinese and English).

 

Here is one interesting Chinese discovery from the text: " Biological

holography is a theory put forth in 1980 by Zhang Jingqing, a Chinese

scholar. (This means that) each small subsection of a living creature

contains the complete whole. "

 

 

 

 

 

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. While there are many enthusiastic researchers and physicians, the biomedical and especially the pharmaceutical world as entities are very conservative and not that open to change in my experience (lecturing at medical schools and research institutes, reading the medical literature).

>>>>>hopefully this will change

Alon

 

-

 

Sunday, November 25, 2001 2:04 PM

Re: Re: paradigm shift

On Sunday, November 25, 2001, at 11:48 AM, James Ramholz wrote:

A paradigm shift is inevitable. In the West, the paradigm shiftinvolves Complexity Theory. Although there is already muchdeliniation of that theory, it doesn't seem to affect the practiceof Western medicine except at the fringes.(Z'ev) I agree. While there are many enthusiastic researchers and physicians, the biomedical and especially the pharmaceutical world as entities are very conservative and not that open to change in my experience (lecturing at medical schools and research institutes, reading the medical literature). The Santa Fe Institute is one small island that has done some research on immunology from a complexity orientation, and the data is very interesting.

CM is changing simply because it is in America and interacting withWestern medicine. It will participate in the paradigm shift becauseits theories are sometimes said to be a paraphrase of ComplexityTheory (by myself and others). It is especially, I think, when wedescribe 5-Phases as a self-organizing system, and use 3-depths inpulses to follow the interaction between emotional, functional, andstructurative aspects of the body.(Z'ev) There is no doubt that holography, chronobiology, fractals and complexity theory can elucidate on Chinese medical theory in ways that biomedical science cannot. The Chinese are on to this as well. . . .see the very interesting "Book of Changes and Traditional " by Yang Li, Beijing Science and Technology Press (both Chinese and English).Here is one interesting Chinese discovery from the text: "Biological holography is a theory put forth in 1980 by Zhang Jingqing, a Chinese scholar. (This means that) each small subsection of a living creature contains the complete whole."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

, " James Ramholz " <jramholz> wrote:

> A paradigm shift is inevitable.

 

It may be inevitable, but its form is not preordained. How we engage

the prevailing paradigm will determine what role CM plays in the

development of the new one.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

, " " <zrosenbe@s...>

wrote: see the very interesting " Book of Changes and Traditional

" by Yang Li, Beijing Science and Technology Press

(both Chinese and English).

>

> Here is one interesting Chinese discovery from the

text: " Biological holography is a theory put forth in 1980 by Zhang

Jingqing, a Chinese scholar. (This means that) each small

subsection of a living creature contains the complete whole. "

 

 

 

Z'ev:

 

While Yan Li's book mentions a lot of interesting ideas from Chinese

philosophy, there are some things in the book that spoil its

credibility. He quotes a source (p. 366) from 1990 that says a

severed head was kept alive for 6 days; another head that was frozen

for 60 years could answer questions after electrical stimulation.

Or, I've got to read more than the comics if I'm missing things like

this in the newspaper.

 

Jim Ramholz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well. . . .I don't remember that one! An interesting way to try to

build credibility. . . .Ripley's believe it or not, here we come!

 

Z'ev

On Sunday, November 25, 2001, at 06:47 PM, James Ramholz wrote:

>

>

>

>

> Z'ev:

>

> While Yan Li's book mentions a lot of interesting ideas from Chinese

> philosophy, there are some things in the book that spoil its

> credibility. He quotes a source (p. 366) from 1990 that says a

> severed head was kept alive for 6 days; another head that was frozen

> for 60 years could answer questions after electrical stimulation.

> Or, I've got to read more than the comics if I'm missing things like

> this in the newspaper.

>

> Jim Ramholz

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

 

>

>

> 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.

>

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

, " " <zrosenbe@s...>

wrote:

> Well. . . .I don't remember that one! An interesting way to try

to build credibility. . . .Ripley's believe it or not, here we come!

 

 

 

Probably just one of those unstandardized translation problems.

Otherwise, I liked the book quite a bit.

 

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't Kuhn also say that individuals shift to a new paradigm only

through attrition? If I remember Kuhn correctly (it's been a long

time), I seem to remember him saying that individuals do not change

paradigms, generations do. A paradigm ceases to exist only when all

the members of the generation who held that paradigm die out and are

supplanted by a new generation believing in the new paradigm. Along

the same lines, Mark Twain said something about, " If a person holds

and idea for 20 minutes straight, they will believe that idea the rest

of their life. "

 

Bob

 

P.S. I have not read the entire thread on this issue. Is complexity

theory the same as chaos theory? Is this the new nomenclature, or are

the two different?

 

, wrote:

> I desire to see a paradigm shift in medicine. but my reading of

Kuhn

> suggests unequivocally that paradigms only shift when a series of

> experiments pushes the limits of the prevailing paradigm and

discloses

> data that cannot be accommodated by that old paradigm. Merely

> practicing our craft does not accomplish this goal. We must first

test

> our methods against the prevailing paradigm, which involves using

> accepted objective lab tests to verify our results. In a study like

the

> one that has been approved at OCOM, this will accomplish 2 things.

We

> will prove the efficacy of chinese medicine on its own terms, as

this

> study uses TCM differential dx. However, the fact the the TCM

method

> works will push science towards a new paradigm that has to

accommodate

> the value of differential dx as we do it. But it is not likely that

TCM

> will become the new paradigm itself; it will merely provide impetus

> towards a new paradigm that we cannot yet foresee. As for the use

of

> modern diagnostics, I support the use of standard tests like

ultrasound,

> bloodwork, etc. I have no interest in gadgets that do TCM dx as

> described in the article about Taiwan. Those who will play no role

in

> this development are those who adhere completely to traditional

methods

> and eschew modern science altogether. That is not how paradigms

shift.

> we engage them on their own terms and show them how their view of

the

> universe is limited and how it can be expanded by looking at ours.

This

> does nothing to rend the fabric of TCM as long as we always set up

> experiments to challenge the existing paradigm. On the other hand,

> those who set up allopathic type experiments that use one herb

formula

> regardless of TCM pattern are working against the paradigm shift and

> should not be supported. The fact that NIH approved OCOM means that

all

> future proposals should be set up this way. there is now no reason

to

> do otherwise.

>

>

> --

> Chinese Herbs

>

> FAX:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Al Stone wrote:

 

James Ramholz wrote:

> another head that was frozen

> for 60 years could answer questions after electrical stimulation.

Any head can answer questions, but is there any real insight? ;

)

--

Al Stone L.Ac.

<AlStone

http://www.BeyondWellBeing.com

Pain is inevitable, suffering is optional.

 

It couldn't be embodied.

--

Frances Lea Gander, L.Ac., Dipl. Ac.

www.carr.org/~fgander

 

 

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.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frances Gander wrote:

 

> > > another head that was frozen

> > > for 60 years could answer questions after electrical stimulation.

> >

> > Any head can answer questions, but is there any real insight? ; )

 

> It couldn't be embodied.

 

At least he couldn't stick his foot in his mouth.

 

-al.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Complexity theory is an 'update', a further development of chaos theory

as I understand it through my own study. One of its basic postulates is

that complex systems exist between chaos and order, and as they approach

a chaotic state, find a new level of order before they dissipate.

Examples of complex systems include cities, the stock market, the immune

system, and ant colonies. An excellent book on the subject, my

favorite, is Stuart Kauffman's " At Home in the Universe " .

 

 

On Monday, November 26, 2001, at 08:02 AM, pemachophel2001

wrote:

 

>

>

> P.S. I have not read the entire thread on this issue. Is complexity

> theory the same as chaos theory? Is this the new nomenclature, or are

> the two different?

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the note on Complexity Theory I like to use in my pulse

seminars. CM, especially 5-Phases, fits well with it because they

both try to describe living systems.

 

Jim Ramholz

 

 

 

A Sketch of Complex Systems

from Paul Cilliers in " Complexity & Postmodernism " (Routledge, 1998)

 

At this stage it could be expected of one to provide at least a

working definition of what " complexity " might mean. Unfortunately

the concept remains elusive at both the qualitative and quantitative

levels. One useful description, by Luhmann (1985: 25), states that

complexity entails that, in a system, there are more possibilities

than can be actualized. This can hardly serve as definition, but

perhaps one should not be surprised if complexity cannot be given a

simple definition. Instead, an analysis of characteristics of

complex systems can be attempted in order to develop a general

description that is not constrained by a specific, a priori

definition. That is what will be attempted in this section. I will

turn to the problem of quantifying complexity in the next section.

Before turning to some characteristics of complex systems, we have

to look at two important distinctions. The distinction

between " simple " and " complex " is not as sharp as we may intuitively

think (Nicolis and Prigogine 1989: 5). Many systems appear simple,

but reveal remarkable complexity when examined closely (e.g. a

leaf). Others appear complex, but can be described simply, e.g. some

machines, such as the internal combustion engine. To compound

matters, complexity is not located at a specific, identifiable site

in a system. Because complexity results from the interaction between

the components of a system, complexity is manifested at the level of

the system itself. There is neither something at a level below (a

source), nor at a level above (a meta-description), capable of

capturing the essence of complexity. The distinction between complex

and simple often becomes a function of our " distance " from the

system (Serra and Zanarim 1990: 4, 5), i.e. of the kind of

description of the system we are using. A little aquarium can be

quite simple as a decoration (seen from afar), but as a system it

can be quite complex (seen from close by). This does not imply that

complexity is merely a linguistic phenomenon, or simply a function

of our description of the system. Complex systems do have

characteristics that are not merely determined by the point of view

of the observer. It does, however, imply that care has to be taken

when talking about complexity. The simple and the complex often mask

each other.

A second important distinction, and one that is equally

difficult to maintain consistently, is the one between complex and

complicated. Some systems have a very large number of components and

perform sophisticated tasks, but in a way that can be analyzed (in

the full sense of the word) accurately. Such a system is

complicated. Other systems are constituted by such intricate sets of

non-linear relationships and feedback loops that only certain

aspects of them can be analyzed at a time. Moreover, these analyses

would always cause distortions. Systems of this kind are complex. I

have heard it said (by someone from France, of course) that a jumbo

jet is complicated, but that a mayonnaise is complex. Other examples

of complicated systems, systems that can, in principle, be given an

exact description, would be a CD-player, a snowflake, the Mandelbrot

set. Complex systems are usually associated with living things: a

bacterium, the brain, social systems, language. This distinction

remains an analytical one that is undermined specifically by

powerful new technologies (e.g. is a fast computer with a very large

memory complex or complicated?), but it is useful in developing a

description of the characteristics of complex systems. I offer the

following list:

 

(i) Complex systems consist of a large number of elements. When

the number is relatively small, the behavior of the elements can

often be given a formal description in conventional terms. However,

when the number becomes sufficiently large, conventional means (e.g.

a system of differential equations) not only become impractical,

they also cease to assist in any understanding of the system.

(ii) A large number of elements are necessary, but not

sufficient. The grains of sand on a beach do not interest us as a

complex system. In order to constitute a complex system, the

elements have to interact, and this interaction must be dynamic. A

complex system changes with time. The interactions do not have to be

physical; they can also be thought of as the transference of

information.

(iii) The interaction is fairly rich, i.e. any element in the

system influences, and is influenced by, quite a few other ones. The

behavior of the system, however, is not determined by the exact

amount of interactions associated with specific elements. If there

are enough elements in the system (of which some are redundant), a

number of sparsely connected elements can perform the same function

as that of one richly connected element.

(iv) The interactions themselves have a number of important

characteristics. Firstly, the interactions are non-linear. A large

system of linear elements can usually be collapsed into an

equivalent system that is very much smaller. Non-linearity also

guarantees that small causes can have large results, and vice versa.

It is a precondition for complexity.

(v) The interactions usually have a fairly short range, i.e.

information is received primarily from immediate neighbors. Long-

range interaction is not impossible, but practical constraints

usually force this consideration. This does not preclude wide-

ranging influence - since the interaction is rich, the route from

one element to any other can usually be covered in a few steps. As a

result, the influence gets modulated along the way. It can be

enhanced, suppressed or altered in a number of ways.

(vi) There are loops in the interactions. The effect of any

activity can feed back onto itself, sometimes directly, sometimes

after a number of intervening stages. This feedback can be positive

(enhancing, stimulating) or negative (detracting, inhibiting). Both

kinds are necessary. The technical term for this aspect of a complex

system is recurrency.

(vii) Complex systems are usually open systems, i.e. they

interact with their environment. As a matter of fact, it is often

difficult to define the border of a complex system. Instead of being

a characteristic of the system itself, the scope of the system is

usually determined by the purpose of the description of the system,

and is thus often influenced by the position of the observer. This

process is called framing. Closed systems are usually merely

complicated.

(viii) Complex systems operate under conditions far from

equilibrium. There has to be a constant flow of energy to maintain

the organization of the system and to ensure its survival.

Equilibrium is another word for death.

(ix) Complex systems have a history. Not only do they evolve

through time, but their past is co-responsible for their present

behavior. Any analysis of a complex system that ignores the

dimension of time is incomplete, or at most a synchronic snapshot of

a diachronic process.

Each element in the system is ignorant of the behavior of the

system as a whole, it responds only to information that is available

to it locally. This point is vitally important. If each

element " knew " what was happening to the system as a whole, all of

the complexity would have to be present in that element. This would

either entail a physical impossibility in the sense that a single

element does not have the necessary capacity, or constitute a

metaphysical move in the sense that " consciousness " of the whole is

contained in one particular unit. Complexity is the result of a rich

interaction of simple elements that only respond to the limited

information each of them are presented with. When we look at the

behaviour of a complex system as a whole, our focus shifts from the

individual element in the system to the complex structure of the

system. The complexity emerges as a result of the patterns of

interaction between the elements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bucky Fuller anticipated the development

of complexity theory decades ago with the

coining of the term " synergy " to describe

the behavior of a whole system that is not

predicted by any of its sub-systems . This

in turn is based upon a rather old bit of

practical wisdom that holds that the whole

is greater than the sum of its parts. Curiously,

Bucky showed that the commonly held belief

that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link is

invalid when seen with the light of synergy.

 

The whole universe is one interconnected

chain, and the local regions that exhibit

behaviors such as the radiation emerging

from stars or the thoughts emerging from

a human brain, demonstrate that this

cosmic chain is capable of developing

strengths that far exceed those of its

weakest links, the hydrogen atoms that

make up the bulk of cosmic matter and

the various sub-atomic particles that are

their constituents.

 

The Daoists realized millenia ago that

the whole universal chain (dao4) is based

on nothing, noting that " something and

nothing create each other. " Chaos theory

emerged as a consequence of the modern

recognition of this long known fact. Chaos

is a Greek word that means " emptiness. "

In ancient Greek cosmology it was from

the maw of chaos that the cosmos (order)

of the world emerged.

 

Descriptions of complex adaptive systems

now cleave to a sensibility that closely

approximates the old Daoist state of mind.

And suddenly Chinese medicine appears

as a living tradition that embraces both

the most ancient and most modern points

of view.

 

I'm currently working on an paper that

explores some of these basic issues and

presents notes on the development of

a methodology for bringing this confluence

to the attention of people working in

both fields in the hopes of helping advance

along a number of frontiers.

 

We can continue this here or move it

over to the list we set up specifically

for this topic, as I know that this list

likes to remain focused on clinical issues;

and the clinical relevance of all this

may or may not be apparent.

 

Ken

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And his principles of tensegrity are only now beginning to be applied to biological systems. In actuality all biological systems are tensegrity icosahedron structures

Alon

 

 

-

yulong

Wednesday, November 28, 2001 7:31 PM

Re: paradigm shift

Bucky Fuller anticipated the developmentof complexity theory decades ago with thecoining of the term "synergy" to describethe behavior of a whole system that is notpredicted by any of its sub-systems . This in turn is based upon a rather old bit of practical wisdom that holds that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Curiously, Bucky showed that the commonly held belief that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link isinvalid when seen with the light of synergy.The whole universe is one interconnectedchain, and the local regions that exhibitbehaviors such as the radiation emergingfrom stars or the thoughts emerging froma human brain, demonstrate that thiscosmic chain is capable of developingstrengths that far exceed those of itsweakest links, the hydrogen atoms thatmake up the bulk of cosmic matter andthe various sub-atomic particles that aretheir constituents.The Daoists realized millenia ago thatthe whole universal chain (dao4) is based on nothing, noting that "something andnothing create each other." Chaos theoryemerged as a consequence of the modernrecognition of this long known fact. Chaosis a Greek word that means "emptiness."In ancient Greek cosmology it was fromthe maw of chaos that the cosmos (order)of the world emerged.Descriptions of complex adaptive systemsnow cleave to a sensibility that closelyapproximates the old Daoist state of mind.And suddenly Chinese medicine appearsas a living tradition that embraces boththe most ancient and most modern pointsof view. I'm currently working on an paper thatexplores some of these basic issues andpresents notes on the development ofa methodology for bringing this confluenceto the attention of people working inboth fields in the hopes of helping advancealong a number of frontiers.We can continue this here or move itover to the list we set up specificallyfor this topic, as I know that this listlikes to remain focused on clinical issues;and the clinical relevance of all thismay or may not be apparent.KenChinese 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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curiously, Bucky showed that the commonly held belief that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link isinvalid when seen with the light of synergy.>>>>There must be at least 12 compression structures within tension for this to be true

Alon

 

-

yulong

Wednesday, November 28, 2001 7:31 PM

Re: paradigm shift

Bucky Fuller anticipated the developmentof complexity theory decades ago with thecoining of the term "synergy" to describethe behavior of a whole system that is notpredicted by any of its sub-systems . This in turn is based upon a rather old bit of practical wisdom that holds that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Curiously, Bucky showed that the commonly held belief that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link isinvalid when seen with the light of synergy.The whole universe is one interconnectedchain, and the local regions that exhibitbehaviors such as the radiation emergingfrom stars or the thoughts emerging froma human brain, demonstrate that thiscosmic chain is capable of developingstrengths that far exceed those of itsweakest links, the hydrogen atoms thatmake up the bulk of cosmic matter andthe various sub-atomic particles that aretheir constituents.The Daoists realized millenia ago thatthe whole universal chain (dao4) is based on nothing, noting that "something andnothing create each other." Chaos theoryemerged as a consequence of the modernrecognition of this long known fact. Chaosis a Greek word that means "emptiness."In ancient Greek cosmology it was fromthe maw of chaos that the cosmos (order)of the world emerged.Descriptions of complex adaptive systemsnow cleave to a sensibility that closelyapproximates the old Daoist state of mind.And suddenly Chinese medicine appearsas a living tradition that embraces boththe most ancient and most modern pointsof view. I'm currently working on an paper thatexplores some of these basic issues andpresents notes on the development ofa methodology for bringing this confluenceto the attention of people working inboth fields in the hopes of helping advancealong a number of frontiers.We can continue this here or move itover to the list we set up specificallyfor this topic, as I know that this listlikes to remain focused on clinical issues;and the clinical relevance of all thismay or may not be apparent.KenChinese 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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In ancient Greek cosmology it was fromthe maw of chaos that the cosmos (order)of the world emerged

>>>This is also right from the bible. The word tou vavou is chaos

Alon

 

-

yulong

Wednesday, November 28, 2001 7:31 PM

Re: paradigm shift

Bucky Fuller anticipated the developmentof complexity theory decades ago with thecoining of the term "synergy" to describethe behavior of a whole system that is notpredicted by any of its sub-systems . This in turn is based upon a rather old bit of practical wisdom that holds that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Curiously, Bucky showed that the commonly held belief that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link isinvalid when seen with the light of synergy.The whole universe is one interconnectedchain, and the local regions that exhibitbehaviors such as the radiation emergingfrom stars or the thoughts emerging froma human brain, demonstrate that thiscosmic chain is capable of developingstrengths that far exceed those of itsweakest links, the hydrogen atoms thatmake up the bulk of cosmic matter andthe various sub-atomic particles that aretheir constituents.The Daoists realized millenia ago thatthe whole universal chain (dao4) is based on nothing, noting that "something andnothing create each other." Chaos theoryemerged as a consequence of the modernrecognition of this long known fact. Chaosis a Greek word that means "emptiness."In ancient Greek cosmology it was fromthe maw of chaos that the cosmos (order)of the world emerged.Descriptions of complex adaptive systemsnow cleave to a sensibility that closelyapproximates the old Daoist state of mind.And suddenly Chinese medicine appearsas a living tradition that embraces boththe most ancient and most modern pointsof view. I'm currently working on an paper thatexplores some of these basic issues andpresents notes on the development ofa methodology for bringing this confluenceto the attention of people working inboth fields in the hopes of helping advancealong a number of frontiers.We can continue this here or move itover to the list we set up specificallyfor this topic, as I know that this listlikes to remain focused on clinical issues;and the clinical relevance of all thismay or may not be apparent.KenChinese 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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

, yulong@m... wrote:

> and the clinical relevance of all this

> may or may not be apparent.

 

 

But we can look at aspects of Complexity Theory that have an

important and immediate clinical value; that are not simply

philosophical.

 

The first clinical aspect is found when viewing 5-Phases as a

diagram of a self-organizing system. While based on the fractal

proportions of the Golden Mean (interestingly, as non-linearity

increases the golden mean curve is the important boundary curve

between chaos and order), 5-Phases fulfills the requirement of

living systems to continuously renew and regulate its dynamic

processes in a way that the integrity of its structure is

maintained. 5-Phases shows how this maintenance and renewal,

generally described as balance, can occur in terms of CM. Feedback

coupling and strong dependence on initial conditions figure

prominently. The dynamic interaction of 5-Phases best analyzes and

predicts the future possible states of patients and seasons as

described in the Mai Jing and Yun Qi sections of the Nei Jing. 8-

Principles merely lists symptoms; change is inferred by the

practitioner.

 

The second clinical aspect is in the application of pulse diagnosis.

When examining the pulses according to 3-depths---qi, blood, and

organ (adapted) depths based on the Nan Jing---we can follow the

idea from Complexity Theory that biological systems favor

dissipative structures. We directly observe how the patient is

linked to their environment (qi depth); how self-regulation

maintains the non-linear factors (such as activation, inhibition,

direct auto-catalysis of the systems integrity, and matter exchange)

at the blood depth; and the structuralized resources for maintenance

and renewal at the organ depth---as well as the interrelationship

between these hierarchical levels.

 

 

James Ramholz, O.M.D.

1st Avenue Chiropractic Center

100 Monroe

Denver, CO 80206

(303) 522-3348

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Ken,

The cosmic " system " is based on opposites. The Eternal

Tao has no opposites.As the " Mother " of things it

" appears " as opposites. But the etenal Tao has no

system. It is what " Is " prior to all manifestation.

When " manifest " or " substantial " it appears as

" things " but in and of itself it is " no-thing " .But

this " nothingness " has Energetic Radiance.

This Radiance is what enables true " Spiritual "

healing. I propose that there is a difference between

the balancing of the system of the bodymind via

understanding of cosmic systems/s and the purufication

of the bodymind via submission to nondual Maha Shakti

or the Light of the Divine..

In the Mahayana Schools of Buddhism there is debate

between different schools/teachers about the meaning

of " Emptiness " which is defined by some as the ground

field of all phenomena.

 

This Ground field is non-dualistic. Whereas phenomena,

the world of " things " manifests as a complexity of

systems of opposites.

 

In the highest spiritual traditions the focal point of

practice is this non-dualistic ground field. In Zen it

is the supreme awareness beyond opposites without

identification with body and mind(supposedly).

 

In the Vedantic schools the Divine was seen as Eternal

and Non Dual Light pervading the world and Enlivening

it.

 

Sat(Reality) Chit(Concsiousness)Ananda(Bliss).

 

It is important to be careful about this definition of

" nothing. " Because I assure you it is intuited as

" something prior to things-for want of better words in

the context of spiritual practice.

 

The world of things is changing but the Tao is

Changeless. This Essential pervading Force of Reality

has been given many names. Atman. Brahman. God. Buddha

Mind.The Divine. The Tao.

 

Could you let me know of this list you created for

this topic. I have been exploring the relationship of

some of these issues with relative to clinical

practice.And also relative to my own understanding of

these matters.

 

Frederick Court

 

Ida Zazen Dojo

--- Alon Marcus <alonmarcus wrote:

> In ancient Greek cosmology it was from

> the maw of chaos that the cosmos (order)

> of the world emerged

> >>>This is also right from the bible. The word tou

> vavou is chaos

> Alon

> -

> yulong

>

> Wednesday, November 28, 2001 7:31 PM

> Re: paradigm shift

>

>

> Bucky Fuller anticipated the development

> of complexity theory decades ago with the

> coining of the term " synergy " to describe

> the behavior of a whole system that is not

> predicted by any of its sub-systems . This

> in turn is based upon a rather old bit of

> practical wisdom that holds that the whole

> is greater than the sum of its parts. Curiously,

> Bucky showed that the commonly held belief

> that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link

> is

> invalid when seen with the light of synergy.

>

> The whole universe is one interconnected

> chain, and the local regions that exhibit

> behaviors such as the radiation emerging

> from stars or the thoughts emerging from

> a human brain, demonstrate that this

> cosmic chain is capable of developing

> strengths that far exceed those of its

> weakest links, the hydrogen atoms that

> make up the bulk of cosmic matter and

> the various sub-atomic particles that are

> their constituents.

>

> The Daoists realized millenia ago that

> the whole universal chain (dao4) is based

> on nothing, noting that " something and

> nothing create each other. " Chaos theory

> emerged as a consequence of the modern

> recognition of this long known fact. Chaos

> is a Greek word that means " emptiness. "

> In ancient Greek cosmology it was from

> the maw of chaos that the cosmos (order)

> of the world emerged.

>

> Descriptions of complex adaptive systems

> now cleave to a sensibility that closely

> approximates the old Daoist state of mind.

> And suddenly Chinese medicine appears

> as a living tradition that embraces both

> the most ancient and most modern points

> of view.

>

> I'm currently working on an paper that

> explores some of these basic issues and

> presents notes on the development of

> a methodology for bringing this confluence

> to the attention of people working in

> both fields in the hopes of helping advance

> along a number of frontiers.

>

> We can continue this here or move it

> over to the list we set up specifically

> for this topic, as I know that this list

> likes to remain focused on clinical issues;

> and the clinical relevance of all this

> may or may not be apparent.

>

> Ken

>

>

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frederick Court <fwrcourt>

The cosmic " system " is based on opposites.

 

Jim: Not any longer. " Opposites " is an older, metaphysical

description of the universe. Chaos and Complexity theory are not

based on metaphyiscs or opposites; they do not try to mirror another

or higher reality. The definition of Complexity is borrowed from

information theory. The more complex a system, the more information

it is capable of carrying. A living system is " near " the edge of

chaos (not the randomness or a nothing) where order is put in peril,

and the frozen world of symmetry and order. Hence, there are three

terms, not duality (unless you reduce or change the argument). As

the Dao De Jing says, if we look at it one way, there is mystery, if

we look at it another way, there is all the phenomenon of things.

The hidden, third term in our system, then, is the observer

themselves.

 

 

Court: In the Mahayana Schools of Buddhism there is debate

between different schools/teachers about the meaning

of " Emptiness " which is defined by some as the ground

field of all phenomena.

 

Jim: Different observers, so it sounds like the argument about the

elephant.

 

 

Jim Ramholz

 

 

 

James Ramholz, O.M.D.

1st Avenue Chiropractic Center

100 Monroe

Denver, CO 80206

(303) 522-3348

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jim, Frank,

 

> The hidden, third term in our system, then, is the observer

> themselves.

 

Well put. This was the awareness that Bohr brought

to the study of the atom and which he himself attributed

to the Daoists: on the stage of life we are both actors

and audience. It is a cornerstone of complementarity which

is a far more useful notion than opposition.

 

I've never been really very certain of what it means

to be opposite.

 

One of the things that we came to appreciate while

we were doing the research and writing of our

new book about qi4, is that it, too, occupies this

same position as a hidden third term in a cosmological

system described in the Dao4 De2 Jing1 two of whose

other elements are yin1 and yang2.

 

It's qi4 that makes the consideration of these

as " opposites " unwieldy, since at their roots

yin1 and yang2 contain, embrace, and engender

one another. The understanding of opposition

is intimately linked in Western minds to a series

of dichotomies or dilemmas upon which

these minds conceive themselves to be hung,

i.e. right and wrong, true and false, good and evil.

 

As we know, enormous power can be generated

when dealing with such polarities. So it comes

down to a question of the details of how such

power is brought into being, stored up, refined

and cultivated, and perhaps most importantly

how it is used.

 

Since we're talking about paradigm shifts,

here's a passage from a book by Lin Yu Tang

called The Gay Genius. It's a study of the

life and times of one of China's greatest

poets, Su Tung Po of the Song dynasty.

 

I believe that it reveals something important

about the character of knowledge and learning

in traditional China, which is after all where

traditional Chinese medicine comes from.

It can be read as a partial description of

the traditional Chinese paradigm.

 

" To meet the official tests, the students had to cover in their readings all

the ancient classics, history and poetry, and selected prose. Naturally they

had to commit the classics to memory, and recitation in class consisted of

repeating the passages by heart, with the student's back turned towards

the teacher to prevent him from looking at the book lying open on the

teacher's desk. The more ambitious ones would memorize whole chapters

from the histories. It was not only the contents and information that were

important but also the langauge and phraseology, which were to become

elements in a writer's vocabulary. The use of a famous phrase or of an

allusion without indicating the source aroused an aristocratic and egoistic

pleasure in the learned reader. It was a kind of coterie language; the

reader conceived a respect for the writer for writing it and for himself for

understanding it. It worked by suggestion and the association of ideas,

and was always more effective than an explicit statement that lacked the

charm of suggestion. "

 

I was trying to get at this point about the

association of ideas when I was inquiring

of Alon about translation the other day.

 

A key question seems to be, what do you have

to know in order to know anything at all about

Chinese medicine?

 

And it is not uncommon to come upon pivotally

important elements such as qi4, which remain

hidden until the right associations are brought

to bear.

 

I'm curious to know what people think qi4 means.

 

Ken

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A key question seems to be, what do you haveto know in order to know anything at all aboutChinese medicine?>>>>I certainly do not see my self as particularly knowledgeable about Chinese medicine. But with my typical western mind, what I do know is how to hang out with recognized expert and see their work. For me the bottom line is always outcome and cost (and I think it was and is a great strategy). I have always made choices as to were I want to spend my time. Since I am only interested in the clinical use of Chinese medicine I have not focused on what one might think as requirements of becoming a so call expert

Alon

 

-

yulong

Thursday, November 29, 2001 7:08 PM

Re: paradigm shift

Jim, Frank,> The hidden, third term in our system, then, is the observer > themselves.Well put. This was the awareness that Bohr broughtto the study of the atom and which he himself attributedto the Daoists: on the stage of life we are both actorsand audience. It is a cornerstone of complementarity whichis a far more useful notion than opposition.I've never been really very certain of what it meansto be opposite.One of the things that we came to appreciate whilewe were doing the research and writing of ournew book about qi4, is that it, too, occupies thissame position as a hidden third term in a cosmologicalsystem described in the Dao4 De2 Jing1 two of whoseother elements are yin1 and yang2.It's qi4 that makes the consideration of theseas "opposites" unwieldy, since at their rootsyin1 and yang2 contain, embrace, and engenderone another. The understanding of opposition is intimately linked in Western minds to a series of dichotomies or dilemmas upon whichthese minds conceive themselves to be hung,i.e. right and wrong, true and false, good and evil.As we know, enormous power can be generatedwhen dealing with such polarities. So it comesdown to a question of the details of how suchpower is brought into being, stored up, refinedand cultivated, and perhaps most importantlyhow it is used.Since we're talking about paradigm shifts,here's a passage from a book by Lin Yu Tangcalled The Gay Genius. It's a study of thelife and times of one of China's greatestpoets, Su Tung Po of the Song dynasty.I believe that it reveals something importantabout the character of knowledge and learningin traditional China, which is after all wheretraditional Chinese medicine comes from.It can be read as a partial description ofthe traditional Chinese paradigm."To meet the official tests, the students had to cover in their readings all the ancient classics, history and poetry, and selected prose. Naturally they had to commit the classics to memory, and recitation in class consisted of repeating the passages by heart, with the student's back turned towards the teacher to prevent him from looking at the book lying open on the teacher's desk. The more ambitious ones would memorize whole chapters from the histories. It was not only the contents and information that were important but also the langauge and phraseology, which were to become elements in a writer's vocabulary. The use of a famous phrase or of an allusion without indicating the source aroused an aristocratic and egoistic pleasure in the learned reader. It was a kind of coterie language; the reader conceived a respect for the writer for writing it and for himself for understanding it. It worked by suggestion and the association of ideas, and was always more effective than an explicit statement that lacked the charm of suggestion."I was trying to get at this point about theassociation of ideas when I was inquiringof Alon about translation the other day.A key question seems to be, what do you haveto know in order to know anything at all aboutChinese medicine?And it is not uncommon to come upon pivotallyimportant elements such as qi4, which remainhidden until the right associations are broughtto bear.I'm curious to know what people think qi4 means.KenChinese 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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Jim,

 

Thankyou for your comments.Have some things to

contemplate as I walk in the sun this afternoon.

Fred --- James Ramholz <jramholz wrote:

> Frederick Court <fwrcourt>

> The cosmic " system " is based on opposites.

>

> Jim: Not any longer. " Opposites " is an older,

> metaphysical

> description of the universe. Chaos and Complexity

> theory are not

> based on metaphyiscs or opposites; they do not try

> to mirror another

> or higher reality. The definition of Complexity is

> borrowed from

> information theory. The more complex a system, the

> more information

> it is capable of carrying. A living system is " near "

> the edge of

> chaos (not the randomness or a nothing) where order

> is put in peril,

> and the frozen world of symmetry and order. Hence,

> there are three

> terms, not duality (unless you reduce or change the

> argument). As

> the Dao De Jing says, if we look at it one way,

> there is mystery, if

> we look at it another way, there is all the

> phenomenon of things.

> The hidden, third term in our system, then, is the

> observer

> themselves.

>

>

> Court: In the Mahayana Schools of Buddhism there is

> debate

> between different schools/teachers about the meaning

> of " Emptiness " which is defined by some as the

> ground

> field of all phenomena.

>

> Jim: Different observers, so it sounds like the

> argument about the

> elephant.

>

>

> Jim Ramholz

>

>

>

> James Ramholz, O.M.D.

> 1st Avenue Chiropractic Center

> 100 Monroe

> Denver, CO 80206

> (303) 522-3348

>

>

>

 

 

 

 

 

GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.

http://geocities./ps/info1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...