Digest Number 1283

January 23, 2003

>Greg

>

>I completely agree with you. see my last post on this. what is illogical

>to me is

>that one can just keep adding more subjects to the 4 year masters and expect

>people to learn them all. since there is no agreement on this matter, I

>support

>the OPTION approach.

I see your point. I am not an expert on designing curriculum, so I

don't really care to venture there too much. My comments relate more to

the fact that a school would mandate something like Qi Gong, which I

personally consider to be a subject of less importance (others may find

it to be the most important- this is just me), instead of Chinese

language. I agree that time in Master's programs is limited and must be

used wisely. Why is Qi Gong considered by some if not all schools (or

maybe it's the accreditation folks) to be a mandatory subject. I

*personally* feel time spent studying Chinese is more valuable for

clinical practice than doing Qi Gong. Maybe the option approach is the

way to go- then people can pursue their interests. However, it seems

like making it an option hasn't worked in the schools, since as people

have said on this list the classes have been canceled for lack of

interest.

>The

>only folks

>who insist on the importance of learning chinese are those who already know

>it. You all assure us that if we just followed suit, we would reap the same

>rewards you have. Perhaps.

Doesn't it say something that the people who can read Chinese all say the

same thing- that it's important and valuable. I know you're not arguing

against the value of it, as you have said that in previous posts. The

debate here seems centered around Master's and Doctoral programs. It's a

matter of deciding what's more important. If it were up to me I'd give

Qi Gong the axe and mandate at least a bit of Chinese. Maybe the reason

Chinese as an elective has failed to gain interest is because it's a

tough subject and few are interested in adding another tough class. If

it were mandatory then people would be forced to get through one of the

toughest periods of learning the language and be left with skills that

they could more easily develop on their own after school since they have

a little background- they could look up character in a dictionary at

least, where as now very few can even do that!

>

>But we have more than enough good English language work to keep

>someone busy for 20 years at this point. I look forward to reading all your

>translations. Really. Maybe I just read slow, but I doubt I will ever

>exhaust the

>resources available to me in English, especially with folks like you pumping

>out great information over the next few decades.

You do have a point here. However, is it the best information? Not

always. Can you find everything you could ever want and/or need?

Probably not.

>I am positive I would get

>more benefit from reading a good translation from you than struggling for

>hours to translate a few paragraphs on my own.

Again, point well taken. I said a while back that I felt it's a matter

for each to decide. For some it's not worth it. For young people just

entering the profession though? This may be another matter.

>I am not a giant. I stand on the

>shoulders of giants. you may be a giant. Keep it coming. that will be

>your gift

>to the field.

I am definitely no giant, I just study hard and feel it's paid off. One

of the differences between those who read Chinese and those who don't is

that we have more giants to stand on. :-)

Greg

Greg A. Livingston, L.Ac.

121-1/2 11th Ave

San Francisco, CA 94118

(415) 752-3557

shanren

January 24, 2003

, Greg Livingston <

shanren@c...> wrote:

> Doesn't it say something that the people who can read Chinese all say the

> same thing- that it's important and valuable.

Actually, that is not quite what I said or meant. The only ones who insist on

it

are indeed SOME of the ones who already know it, however MOST of the

people I know who read chinese do not put the essential importance on it that

some on this list do. I certainly agree that not everything out there in

translation is good and that everything I might need in any situation is not

available easily to me. However, even being very selective about what I read,

there is plenty of good stuff out there from paradigm, blue poppy, and

eastland. And while in theory, I might not find all I need to practice

effectively

compared to if I could read chinese, I have found in the past ten years that

that

has not been a reality.

January 25, 2003

However, even being very selective about what I read, there is plenty of good stuff out there from paradigm, blue poppy, and eastland. And while in theory, I might not find all I need to practice effectively compared to if I could read chinese, I have found in the past ten years that that has not been a reality. >>>Beyond that where do you start in the Chinese world or literature? There may be so much available and it may take one so long to read one book, that in the same time one is more likely to get more information using his primary language. Also, any new information would have to be applied clinically and time taken to see if it was fruitful. For a clinician this process has to be workable. Its not about comming up with another 2000 possibilities in treating a condition, its about an efficient approaches to a particular patient and condition. If we are, at this point, so deficient. Than i think we have already lost. If with the many thousands of books, articles and notes that are available one can understand the concepts and principles of TCM than i think we are on the right path, that is, having some people spending most of their time translating and writing, and others at applying and testing.

Alon

January 25, 2003

, " Alon Marcus " <alonmarcus@w...> =

wrote:

> >>>Beyond that where do you start in the Chinese world or literature? The=

re may be so much available and it may take one so long to read one book, th=

at in the same time one is more likely to get more information using his pri=

mary language.

(JASON) I thought I was done, But I must say more...

OF course you can read an English book faster, again this is not the DEBATE=

..... But saying there is so much available that it is pointless is somewhat=

of a silly argument.. A) you are admitting there is so much more in Chinese=

than English... (remember that) – And I think that is only FACT!

b) But , Who reads the whole book, one uses indexes, TOC's etc. just like i=

n English, one goes to the page/chapter and gets the info...

(ALON) Also, any new information would have to be applied clinically and ti=

me taken to see if it was fruitful. For a clinician this process has to be w=

orkable. Its not about coming up with another 2000 possibilities in treating=

a condition, its about an efficient approaches to a particular patient and =

condition. If we are, at this point, so deficient. Than i think we have alre=

ady lost. If with the many thousands of books, articles and notes that are a=

vailable one can understand the concepts and principles of TCM than i think =

we are on the right path, that is, having some people spending most of their=

time translating and writing, and others at applying and testing.

a) Alon, are you not the one who always claims how is fail=

ing us, therefore you have to search for other therapies? If this is so, we/=

you then NEED more info. correct? So it seems you are the one who actually n=

eeds those 2000 other Tx's correct? Why are we lost if we are so deficient.=

..?? IF the material is right there, then we should access it… I really am un=

clear on what you are getting at…

b)Aren't you also responsible for saying that a few months ago that you hav=

e read pretty much everything in English...?? Exhausting all English possib=

ilities? And I personally do not think there is some overwhelming amount of=

information in English... I own almost every internal medicine/ herbs books=

in english - When researching topics, there really is not that much materia=

l, and it doesn't take that long to go through it. I see much much more in =

the Chinese literature.

c) I have no idea what you are getting at when you say that you have to app=

ly it clinically.. are you somehow implying that because you get it from a C=

hinese source you have to go through some different process than if you have=

gotten it from an English source? That is silly... It is just more options.=

.. Let me again use my Cirrhosis of the liver example. One sees a more thoro=

ugh breakdown of the disease process, offering many more Rx choices, this is=

from a internal medicine 'textbook' - Why would I have to take this extensi=

ve time applying these?? I just have been given a MORE COMPLETE breakdown of=

a disease process , yielding me more information, giving me an immediate am=

ount of more useful choices for my patient.! Which do you prefer a breakdown=

with 6 patterns or one with 21 patterns?

Alon, You have made it clear that you don't like to spend your time with Ch=

inese FINE! Then let's leave it at that, But your arguments are far from con=

sistent, and you seem to be somehow trying to putdown the idea of accessing =

information from the Chinese literature. Like the material is less valuable=

or something. If this is indeed what you are saying I only can say I person=

ally think that it is ignorant. Where do you think the English stuff that i=

s avaible now is from? From Wiseman's fundaments (translation) to the many i=

nternal medicine books…

Here is a perfect example of what happens with translations into English.. =

Everyone knows the green Chinese books that all the `Chinese' are reading fr=

om correct? Well the BASIC- green internal medicine book when it was transla=

ted left out many many chapters, just to save space… Do you have a comment a=

bout that? We basically only get the bare bones medicine. Trust me, there =

is much more…

-

January 25, 2003

Jason, I wonder what program you are using to send your messages.

Below is an example of what they look like when I open them in

Eudora, ie barely readable. Where does this = come from in the middle

of a word at the end of every line??

Rory

===========

(JASON) I thought I was done, But I must say more... OF course you

can read an English book faster, again this is not the DEBATE=

..... But saying there is so much available that it is pointless is somewhat=

of a silly argument.. A) you are admitting there is so much more in Chinese=

than English... (remember that) – And I think that is only FACT! b)

But , Who reads the whole book, one uses indexes, TOC's etc. just

like i=