chinese thought

[Guest guest]

In a relatively recent post by Jim Ramholtz:

 

To quote Shinobu Kitayama on the back cover: " The cultural

differences in cognition, demonstrated in this groundbreaking work,

are far more profound and wide-ranging than anybody could have

imagined a decade ago. " Nisbett's explication of Eastern thinking is

an essential prerequisite for understanding their culture, their

ideas, and, consequently, for any translation and understanding of

their literature....Jim Ramholtz<<<

 

Jim

 

I couldn't agree more. There is no doubt that the chinese mode of

thinking differs from western. These differences are apparent in their

language, their art, their music, their martial arts, their meditations,

their philosophy. To understand the logic that goes into the practice of

CM, one must have some exposure, if not immersion, in one or more of these

at some point. Heiner Fruehauf considers this to be the guiding principle

of his CM program at NCNM in Portland. His famously popular one month

trips to Cheng du involve students in study of one or more traditional

arts during this time. However, Heiner does not believe one must know

chinese in order to taste the uniqueness of the chinese mind. One may

taste this difference by practice of qi gong or traditional landscape

painting. While I am torn about whether such subjects should be required

at schools, I am not torn at all about their value. I am sure with regard

to immersing oneself in the chinese mind, any one of the above pursuits

(their language, their art, their music, their martial arts, their

meditations, their philosophy) is as good as any other.

 

 

Chinese Herbs

 

 

" Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocre

minds " -- Albert Einstein

[Guest guest]

, " dragon90405 " wrote:

> It is remarkable how effective language

> can be in understanding thought. It

> is even more remarkable how stridently

> people have long opposed the inclusion

> of language study in the education of

> students of Chinese medicine and how

> vigorously the community in the West

> has given up the near to seek the far.

>

> I agree wholeheartedly with your notion

> here, Jim, and believe that those who

> believe such understanding can be

> achieved without recourse to the

> study of the Chinese language are

> seriously deluded.

 

 

 

Ken:

 

While language is important, even before the study of language, the

cultural differences in cognition should be studied as prolegomenon.

Along this line of thought, Nisbett states: " Analytic thought, which

dissects the world into a limited number of discrete objects having

particular attributes that can be categorized in clear ways, lends

itself to being captured in language. Holistic thought, which

responds to a much wider array of objects and their relations, and

which makes fewer sharp distinctions among attributes or categories,

is less well suited to linguistic representation. "

 

 

Jim Ramholz

[Guest guest]

Bob Felt wrote:

>>>I'm not sure about putting this stuff in classes, however.  I think that each

school could choose what they believe to be a good foundation set and

simply require their accepted students to come having read them.  I think

it would be easy to get the authors of those books to do "web lectures" and

answer new students in an on-line forum.   It seems to me that self-searching

would be better than getting these ideas in a lecture format.   There's a point

at which the schools will have lost all room for innovation and development

because they are so loaded with classroom chores and it doesn't seem

unreasonable to me to make people coming to the profession responsible for

acquiring a reasonable foundation.

 

Bob<<<

 

I agree that schools should beware of overloading classes, but having been through the regimen of required pre-reading sets myself and requiring them of incoming students, I have seen that students still need some kind of setpiece just at the very beginning, some kind of touchstone to get started right, to make sure everyone is more-or-less up to speed. I am only recommending an hour or two at most at the very beginning of the first OM theory class to talk about the difference between Eastern and Western world views. I don't expect everyone to "get" it fully at that point, but later on when students have problems "getting" it, we can say, "Remember back in the first class when we talked about...?" and quickly apply that understanding to the present situation.

 

Even though students have almost all read excellent books on just this topic before starting the first class, I'd say very few have any kind of real understanding about it. I wish it didn't seem necessary to have this, but from my experience in the classroom, it just doesn't seem to work to launch headlong into correspondence theories, yin/yang and such, especially with students having Western medical backgrounds. I think we need to acknowledge where they're coming from and where they're going before setting out on the journey.

Joseph Garner

[Guest guest]

Jim,

 

How do you propose to study cognition if the topic of study is not

communicated via words? I don't think I get what you are saying.

 

Bob

 

, " James Ramholz "

<jramholz> wrote:

> , " dragon90405 " wrote:

> > It is remarkable how effective language

> > can be in understanding thought. It

> > is even more remarkable how stridently

> > people have long opposed the inclusion

> > of language study in the education of

> > students of Chinese medicine and how

> > vigorously the community in the West

> > has given up the near to seek the far.

> >

> > I agree wholeheartedly with your notion

> > here, Jim, and believe that those who

> > believe such understanding can be

> > achieved without recourse to the

> > study of the Chinese language are

> > seriously deluded.

>

>

>

> Ken:

>

> While language is important, even before the study of language, the

> cultural differences in cognition should be studied as prolegomenon.

> Along this line of thought, Nisbett states: " Analytic thought, which

> dissects the world into a limited number of discrete objects having

> particular attributes that can be categorized in clear ways, lends

> itself to being captured in language. Holistic thought, which

> responds to a much wider array of objects and their relations, and

> which makes fewer sharp distinctions among attributes or categories,

> is less well suited to linguistic representation. "

>

>

> Jim Ramholz

[Guest guest]

> , " dragon90405 " wrote:

It

> > is even more remarkable how stridently

> > people have long opposed the inclusion

> > of language study in the education of

> > students of Chinese medicine

 

 

for the record, I support the inclusion of chinese language studies at the

masters level. I support this because I think everyone should be exposed to

chinese (as I was) and because the more who are exposed, the more it will

enrich our profession over the long term. my oft-stated position is that it

doesn't seem to make a difference in clinical efficacy in a general practice.

this is based upon 12 years of working in environments where I typically got to

observe the styles and results of dozens of experienced practitioners and

hundreds of students. I would never be so bold as to suggest my own

personal experience in isolation from my peers would be evidence of

anything. But that is the nice thing about school clinics. You get to compare

and contrast, share notes and so on. No one lies about their expertise in a

school clinic. Everyone knows how everyone else is doing. We all treat each

other's patients from time to time. Perhaps this situation has made me focus

on other areas besides chinese language. I have always had unlimited

access to numerous chinese doctors. Most of them are like walking

encyclopedias. Perhaps my motivation would be different if I didn't have this

handy resource. hmmm. kinda makes you think....

 

[Guest guest]

acugrpaz wrote:

 

> it just doesn't

> seem to work to launch headlong into correspondence theories, yin/yang

> and such, especially with students having Western medical backgrounds.

> I think we need to acknowledge where they're coming from and where

> they're going before setting out on the journey.

 

I agree, and the best training I had prior to entering the MTOM program

was simply reading The Web that Has No Weaver. I encourage new students

to read that book prior to attending any TCM program.

 

--

Al Stone L.Ac.

<AlStone

http://www.BeyondWellBeing.com

 

Pain is inevitable, suffering is optional.

[Guest guest]

, " Bob Flaws "

<pemachophel2001> wrote:

> How do you propose to study cognition if the topic of study is not

> communicated via words? I don't think I get what you are saying.

 

 

Bob:

 

Cognition and perception can be tested and studied in a variety of

ways---it takes up much of Nibett's book. Cognition and perception

have many preverbal aspects; so language is not the sole conveyer of

meaning. It is the tip of the iceberg.

 

Nibett is talking about the differences in cognition, perception,

and thinking between Western and Eastern cultures---and the

consequences for language and behaviors. Those differences are often

dramatic and unconscious. One example in the book is that Asians

think that if you argue linearly or logically (premise, argument,

summary, conclusion) it is a less intelligent way of expressing

yourself.

 

As you must realize from your translations and readings in CM, the

two cultures see entirely different worlds. Objects and

relationships do not have an objective existence separate from the

observer. And the observer's perception, cognition, and thinking are

culturally determined.

 

But the differences go much further than people have realized

earlier. Nisbett writes about his and other researchers' findings

that show how these tacit cultural differences lead one to see and

think about things in much different ways. Those differences are not

solely encoded in their respective languages but also in their

culturally determined behaviors, attitudes, perceptions, etc.

Without being aware of those differences, a translation risks being

inauthentic to the original.

 

 

Jim Ramholz

[Guest guest]

Got it.

 

Thanks.

 

Bob

 

 

> Bob:

>

> Cognition and perception can be tested and studied in a variety of

> ways---it takes up much of Nibett's book. Cognition and perception

> have many preverbal aspects; so language is not the sole conveyer of

> meaning. It is the tip of the iceberg.

>

> Nibett is talking about the differences in cognition, perception,

> and thinking between Western and Eastern cultures---and the

> consequences for language and behaviors. Those differences are often

> dramatic and unconscious. One example in the book is that Asians

> think that if you argue linearly or logically (premise, argument,

> summary, conclusion) it is a less intelligent way of expressing

> yourself.

>

> As you must realize from your translations and readings in CM, the

> two cultures see entirely different worlds. Objects and

> relationships do not have an objective existence separate from the

> observer. And the observer's perception, cognition, and thinking are

> culturally determined.

>

> But the differences go much further than people have realized

> earlier. Nisbett writes about his and other researchers' findings

> that show how these tacit cultural differences lead one to see and

> think about things in much different ways. Those differences are not

> solely encoded in their respective languages but also in their

> culturally determined behaviors, attitudes, perceptions, etc.

> Without being aware of those differences, a translation risks being

> inauthentic to the original.

>

>

> Jim Ramholz

[Guest guest]

Jim

>

> While language is important, even before the study of language,

the

> cultural differences in cognition should be studied as

prolegomenon.

> Along this line of thought, Nisbett states: " Analytic thought,

which

> dissects the world into a limited number of discrete objects

having

> particular attributes that can be categorized in clear ways, lends

> itself to being captured in language. Holistic thought, which

> responds to a much wider array of objects and their relations, and

> which makes fewer sharp distinctions among attributes or

categories,

> is less well suited to linguistic representation. "

>

>

> Jim Ramholz

 

While I haven't read Nisbett's book, I certainly

agree with and embrace this idea. In fact, if I

remember correctly, as I don't have a copy of it

to hand, our first book begins with a sentence

that explains a somewhat similar approach.

 

Chinese medicine is a cultural phenomenon, rather

a set of cultural phenomena. Who Can Ride the Dragon?

was specifically published as an aid to the study

of the subject for those who are not already

familiar with a range of topics, all of which

fall under the rubric " cultural " that we

see as critically important.

 

Language; folk beliefs, myths and customs;

philosophy and religion; literature; scientific

history and traditions of knowledge; and sexual

culture. Without some familiarity with each

of these sets of issues, an individual would

be hard pressed to form a rational basis for

the understanding of the various theoretical

notions and methods of Chinese medicine.

 

In the years since its publication, I've

become more and more interested in the

dynamics of how thought and language

interact; and I believe that properly

understood and applied, the tools of

traditional Chinese medicine may provide

signficant insights into this subject

as well as the origins and history of

consciousness.

 

Ken

[Guest guest]

, " dragon90405 " wrote:

the tools of

> traditional Chinese medicine may provide

> signficant insights into this subject

> as well as the origins and history of

> consciousness.

 

 

Ken:

 

Much more interesting things have been happening on the Western

science side. Have you been reading " Science and Consciousness

Review " ?

 

http://psych.pomona.edu/scr/

 

If you haven't look for Tom Clark's review of " The Illusion of

Conscious Will " , by DM Wegner (Cambridge, MIT Press 2002). It's a

fascinating and persuasive book---even scarey. In the review of it,

Clark states:

 

Wegner says, plausibly enough, that the feeling that we consciously

will action – that an act is ours – ordinarily arises whenever

conscious intentions precede behavior: " We tend to see ourselves as

the authors of an act primarily when we have experienced relevant

thoughts about the act at an appropriate interval in advance. " Our

folk-psychological theory of action interprets this regular

sequencing of intention and behavior as causal, with the conscious,

mental intention (the will) driving the physical effect (behavior).

But, Wegner says, the actual causal story behind human behavior

involves a " massively complicated set of mechanisms, " what he calls

the " empirical will, " that produces both intention and action.

Since we aren't in a position to observe or understand these

mechanisms [in ourselves], instantiated as they are by the complex

neural systems of our brain and body, we construct an explanation

involving the experienced, phenomenal will: we, as conscious,

mental, willing agents, simply cause our behavior. "

 

Sounds like Daoism to me!

 

 

Jim Ramholz

[Guest guest]

That reminds me of how, in Asian cultures, a couple would (in the past)

not say 'I love you' to each other, but they would compare themselves to

a pair of birds. That's what I think of when I go to a Chinese person's

house and see a painting of a pair of cranes (or the like).

 

Geoff

 

> >

> > As you must realize from your translations and readings in CM, the

> > two cultures see entirely different worlds. Objects and

> > relationships do not have an objective existence separate from the

> > observer. And the observer's perception, cognition, and

> thinking are

> > culturally determined.

[Guest guest]

Walking by La Jolla shores today watching the huge surf, I saw a little girl eating a horrible hot dog I could smell almost a block away.

 

One of the things that concerns me the most about health in this country is the abominable quality of food that most people eat. When many of us experimented with macrobiotic and other approaches to diet and health in the 60's, theAmerican diet seemed pretty bad. It has gotten much worse since then.

 

 

Z'ev -

 

This little girl probably won't see the severe bone loss I observed in the macrobiotic community amongst middle aged practitioners into it for 15 years. This was in my practice in the Berkshires of Western Massachusetts during the 90s, one town over from the Kushi institute.

 

In addition, a medical doc in the area saw a Tibetan woman with hypertension, and severe pitting edema in the lower body. The woman had been on many diets for such conditions, low salt, high vegetable fiber, all kinds of protein manipulations, many of which made the condition worse. The doc prescribed the traditional Tibetan drink that includes Yak milk, salt and fat....she healed miraculously....food is an interesting thing especially when joined with family of origin and anthropological perspectives. Here is an example of that which seems intuitively correct actually aggravating the problem. Yet - it is superseded by a more intuitively correct star

 

Will

[Guest guest]

The little girl may not get bone loss, but she'll certainly be dealing with obesity, from what I saw.

 

 

And increased risk of cardiovacular disease and cancer...will

[Guest guest]

> Nibett is talking about the differences in cognition, perception, and thinking between Western and Eastern cultures---and the consequences for language and behaviors. Those differences are often dramatic and unconscious. One example in the book is that Asians think that if you argue linearly or logically (premise, argument, summary, conclusion) it is a less intelligent way of expressing > yourself. > Jim Ramholz

 

 

Jim, similar differences exist in the West. The debate in the Vienna Circle (19th & early 20th Century philosophers) pitted the empiricist logicians (from which our statistical science arises) against the supporters of idealism, metaphysics and the like. The latter group gave rise to Western psychology from Freud and Carl Jung to the present day types like Carl Rogers and the Gestalt therapists. The arguments of the Vienna Circle got played out in modern times (1980s - 1990s) between those who argue for "nature" (biological scientists) versus those who argue for "nurture" (clinical psychologists) . The linear premise, argument, summary and conclusion continuum that you suggest for Western thought is the empiricism of Western science. CM is a science and "cultural practice" that does not employ such dualism or insists on a balance point between all dichotomies. Though as you have already noted in earlier posts, 20th Century physicists left the beleagured territory logical empirism a full century ago. It's no accident that we have recent publications like the Tao of Physics by Fritjof Capra. Long before Capra, Carl Jung as well as Joseph Campbell embraced the notion of myth and looked to Asian philosophies to find a richness that we lacked here in the West. Why else have so many of us Meiguo ren made similar transitions in search of cultural nourishment.

 

Speaking of culture and nourishment, the food in Taipei, Taichung and Kaoshiung is so superior to anything in San Francisco which in turn is so superior to anything in most other non-coastal U.S. cities. You actually have to have cultural diversity if you want to even find food much less art and culture in America.

Emmanuel Segmen

[Guest guest]

Walking by La Jolla shores today watching the huge surf, I saw a little

girl eating a horrible hot dog I could smell almost a block away.

 

One of the things that concerns me the most about health in this

country is the abominable quality of food that most people eat. When

many of us experimented with macrobiotic and other approaches to diet

and health in the 60's, theAmerican diet seemed pretty bad. It has

gotten much worse since then.

 

 

On Sunday, March 16, 2003, at 08:10 PM, Emmanuel Segmen wrote:

 

> Speaking of culture and nourishment, the food in Taipei, Taichung and

> Kaoshiung is so superior to anything in San Francisco which in turn is

> so superior to anything in most other non-coastal U.S. cities.  You

> actually have to have cultural diversity if you want to even find food

> much less art and culture in America.

> Emmanuel Segmen

[Guest guest]

, " Emmanuel Segmen " wrote:

> Jim, similar differences exist in the West. >>>

 

 

Emmanuel:

 

And the logical tradition also existed amongst the Chinese logicians

(ming jia) and the Mohists, but, as Nisbett relates, " stopped short

of producing a rigourous system of logical influence. " It did not

become the culturally dominant method. Both traditions, of course,

are not mutually exclusive and in some places, like Hong Kong, exist

side by side in interesting ways.

 

 

Jim Ramholz

[Guest guest]

, " " wrote:

> One of the things that concerns me the most about health in this

> country is the abominable quality of food that most people eat.

When many of us experimented with macrobiotic and other approaches

to diet and health in the 60's, the American diet seemed pretty bad.

It has gotten much worse since then. >>>

 

 

Z'ev:

 

And the sad irony is that there is much more information available

to the public about diet, insulin levels, bad fats, and chronic

disease---etc. Many people admit hearing about it through the

newspaper or TV.

 

I used to try and explain the biochemistry or CM theory of diet;

then watch people roll their eyes with little impact. Then I thought

of using a credit card metaphor--- " You can do or eat anything you

like. You just have to pay for it later, and the mountain of debt

won't go away until you deal with it. It's a debt you owe to your

body. " Compliance has been better.

 

 

Jim Ramholz

[Guest guest]

I wasn't implying that a strict macrobiotic diet is the best or only

way to do things. I always thought the Boston community version of

macrobiotics was dogmatic, fanatical and dangerous.

 

However, I do think that macrobiotics did lead the way to the

natural food movement. . .which essentially is the only alternative to

the junk food epidemic that is destroying the health of Americans.

 

It isn't so much about meat or no meat, it is about the quality of

ingredients and how they are produced.

 

I've followed a personalized version of macrobiotics (qing

dan/clear bland, if you like) for over 35 years. No signs of

malnutrition yet

 

The little girl may not get bone loss, but she'll certainly be

dealing with obesity, from what I saw.

 

 

On Sunday, March 16, 2003, at 09:01 PM, WMorris116 wrote:

 

> Z'ev -

>

> This little girl probably won't see the severe bone loss I observed in

> the macrobiotic community amongst middle aged practitioners into it

> for 15 years. This was in my practice in the Berkshires of Western

> Massachusetts during the 90s, one town over from the Kushi institute.

>

> In addition, a medical doc in the area saw a Tibetan woman with

> hypertension, and severe pitting edema in the lower body. The woman

> had been on many diets for such conditions, low salt, high vegetable

> fiber, all kinds of protein manipulations, many of which made the

> condition worse. The doc prescribed the traditional Tibetan drink that

> includes Yak milk, salt and fat....she healed miraculously....food is

> an interesting thing especially when joined with family of origin and

> anthropological perspectives. Here is an example of that which seems

> intuitively correct actually aggravating the problem. Yet - it is

> superseded by a more intuitively correct star

>

> Will

[Guest guest]

, "" wrote: One of the things that concerns me the most about health in this country is the abominable quality of food that most people eat. When many of us experimented with macrobiotic and other approaches to diet and health in the 60's, the American diet seemed pretty bad. It has gotten much worse since then. >>>Z'ev:And the sad irony is that there is much more information available to the public about diet, insulin levels, bad fats, and chronic disease---etc. Many people admit hearing about it through the newspaper or TV.I used to try and explain the biochemistry or CM theory of diet; then watch people roll their eyes with little impact. Then I thought of using a credit card metaphor---"You can do or eat anything you like. You just have to pay for it later, and the mountain of debt won't go away until you deal with it. It's a debt you owe to your body." Compliance has been better.Jim Ramholz

 

Jim, your idea is beautiful, and I intend to steal it .... though I'll attribute to you. I'm just about to teach a clinical nutrition section in my physiology course. I used to bring in Time magazine ads with famous people with milk-moustaches. Even Donna Shalala, head of Health and Human Services, sported a milk-moustache. I held the ad open for my students to see and exclaimed, "This is what I'm working against as an instructor." Basic science in America does not have a million dollar ad campaigns. Burger King and others do. Introjection of cultural values is what CM has come to treat in America. Nam Singh says that's why he quit doing acupuncture and started teaching diet and giving dietary and lifestyle changes as treatment protocols. Nam said he got tired of "propping people up" just so they could knock themselves down again. Self-care education is an important tool of healthcare and patient management. Mmmm ... I'm starting to sound like a nursing instructor. ;-)

Emmanuel Segmen

 

 

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.

[Guest guest]

 

 

Z'ev - This little girl probably won't see the severe bone loss I observed in the macrobiotic community amongst middle aged practitioners into it for 15 years. This was in my practice in the Berkshires of Western Massachusetts during the 90s, one town over from the Kushi institute. In addition, a medical doc in the area saw a Tibetan woman with hypertension, and severe pitting edema in the lower body. The woman had been on many diets for such conditions, low salt, high vegetable fiber, all kinds of protein manipulations, many of which made the condition worse. The doc prescribed the traditional Tibetan drink that includes Yak milk, salt and fat....she healed miraculously....food is an interesting thing especially when joined with family of origin and anthropological perspectives. Here is an example of that which seems intuitively correct actually aggravating the problem. Yet - it is superseded by a more intuitively correct star Will

You make a good point. But do consider balance in teaching nutritional practices. Americans don't have much.

 

Osteoporosis is seen almost exclusively in North America and Western Europe where animal protein intake is 110 grams per individual and dairy intake is also prodigious. Read anything by T. Colin Campbell, Nutritional Biochemistry Chair, Cornell University. He performed the largest controlled study on nutrition comparing diet in rural China to diet in modern America. It's controlled for 350 diagnostic parameters. It's the current gold standard for nutritional studies of the clinical nutrition variety. Besides noting the high levels of osteoporosis in Americans with high animal protein intake (most especially dairy), he also notes 12 times the heart disease and 9 times the breast cancer in America. I believe the key here is "balance". Americans tend to be extreme in their practices. Many nutritionists including me notes that a diet with 15% of the intake coming from protein means that you need only 2 or 3 ounces of concentrated protein from animal products per day ... maybe 4 or 5 if you're performing over 1,000 calories a day of exercise. That's the directly from my Handbook of Clinical Nutrition (Weinsier - 1989) ... not a radical text. That means 10 miles per day of running, 70 miles per week ... then okay you can have 4 or 5 ounces of lamb, beef, poultry or fish per day. Also Todd's consideration of quality meat products I believe matters a lot. Note that weight lifters training in the gym rarely rack up no more than 90 or 100 calories of work per hour ... for all that work! They move large weights very short distances. Calories of work are determined by moving a mass through a distance. I can easily run 7 miles in one hour and burn 700 calories in that hour. Yet, I rarely eat more than 2 or 3 calories per day of concentrated protein. My distance training takes me over 50 miles per week of hilly California countryside. It's really about balance and doing the numbers. At least from Western nutrition. So far my years with Nam Singh looking at Taoist nutrition is that this wisdom of balance seems to prevail on both sides of the Pacific. My American physiology students get some of their training from Prince Wen Hui's Cook (Flaws - 1983) ... also not a radical text either. But one that I dearly love ... right along with my Handbook of Clinical Nutrition.

Emmanuel Segmen

[Guest guest]

I agree. I am from Kaoshiung.

 

Ta-Ya Lee, CRNP, LAc

Johns Hopkins Community Physician

 

Speaking of culture and nourishment, the food in Taipei, Taichung and

Kaoshiung is so superior to anything in San Francisco which in turn is

so superior to anything in most other non-coastal U.S. cities. You

actually have to have cultural diversity if you want to even find food

much less art and culture in America.

Emmanuel Segmen