Guest guest Posted March 26, 2003 Report Share Posted March 26, 2003 Friends, Romans, and Countrymen, What makes the profession of Chinese medicine susceptible to the perdition of what has recently been referred to in this forum as " new age mumbo jumbo " ? It's the mumbo jumbo of terminology that the profession itself has created over the past couple of decades while it was conceiving and giving birth to itself in the West. This " problem " , this clash of cultures (whether we're thinking about the clash of East and West or the clash of conventional and traditional medicine, as well as a wide range of other so-called clashes) is relatively easy to approach with solutions. But we've simply got to lay a bedrock foundation for the inroads that we need to construct to make such approaches effectively. If you want to drive the mumbo jumbo out of the profession, require that each and every one of us know what we are talking about, what the words mean that we say to patients and to each other. Jung said that the mere use of words is futile if you do not know what they mean. But such use of words does have a meaning. It means that mumbo jumbo is all that exists. In my own experience talking with MDs...and I've talked with hundreds over the past few years...it's not the " new-age " mumbo jumbo that gives Chinese medicine an incomprehensible ring to their " scientific " ears. It's the Chinese medical mumbo jumbo that they have to wade through to find the explanations, whether they be theoretical or clinical, of what Chinese mediince is and does. The loss of soul, spirit, or what ever one wants to call whatever it is we mean when we use these words, is occasioned often by the loss of essence. The establishment of mumbo jumbo as the basis of the subject follows such loss of essence. The essence is in the words. It can be found elsewhere, of course. But we cannot afford to lose sight of the fact that it can be found in the words. All you have to do is look. Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 26, 2003 Report Share Posted March 26, 2003 My experience is the same, Ken. I tell my students over and over, drilling them constantly, to understand the terms, concepts and structure of Chinese medical theory. If they understand that clearly, they will be able to communicate with their patients, other medical professionals, without 'new age mumbo jumbo' . . . .or, pseudo-biomedical mumbo-jumbo. On Wednesday, March 26, 2003, at 04:23 PM, dragon90405 wrote: > > In my own experience talking with MDs...and > I've talked with hundreds over the past few > years...it's not the " new-age " mumbo jumbo > that gives Chinese medicine an incomprehensible > ring to their " scientific " ears. It's the > Chinese medical mumbo jumbo that they have > to wade through to find the explanations, > whether they be theoretical or clinical, > of what Chinese mediince is and does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 26, 2003 Report Share Posted March 26, 2003 Z'ev, > My experience is the same, Ken. > > I tell my students over and over, drilling them constantly, to > understand the terms, concepts and structure of Chinese medical theory. > If they understand that clearly, they will be able to communicate with > their patients, other medical professionals, without 'new age mumbo > jumbo' . . . .or, pseudo-biomedical mumbo-jumbo. > It's analgous to the old saw about currency that says that good currency will drive bad currency out of the market. If people have a good grasp of the terms, the concepts, the structure of the theoretical material and the relationship between all these and the clinical practice, then there is no " demand " for mumbo-jumbo of any kind. And as the grasp of the basic weakens, people naturally begin to grasp for...well, anything that comes along posing as a substitute. The substitutes will always exist. The education of the professional should prepare them to displace them with the genuine. What is the genuine? Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 26, 2003 Report Share Posted March 26, 2003 The essence is in the words.It can be found elsewhere, of course.But we cannot afford to lose sight ofthe fact that it can be found in the words.All you have to do is look.KenWhat is the genuine?Ken Ken, to me this is clarity. Over the recent decades, the U.S has had a vast part of it's economic trade shift to Japan/Taiwan/Korea/China. With this new interaction and elevated level of communication, schools of CM have popped up and become accredited. It's a natural process as our Pacific Rim cultures interact ... ever more so every year. The next steps are gradually being taken as CM schools begin to offer doctorates and Kaiser hospitals and other clinics begin to employ CM practitioners. This developmental process of cultural interaction is only in it's early stages. The stress that I'm hearing in some voices seems related to the discomfort of being in these early stages. The process is really only beginning, and there's much to be discovered, attended to, and worked out. East and West have developed separately, though you have noted in your writing that elements of Asian knowledge and wisdom have seeped across the boundaries from time to time. Now the seeping changes velocity and people in both realms take professions that originated in the other realm. Asia produces MDs, cars and American consumer items. America, more slowly, begins to develop professions for CM practitioners. The discomfort of not being viewed as "genuine" or authentic is rather difficult. You've addressed this issue of what's genuine. A significant number of people on this list are happy to embrace the current state of affairs as it unfolds. A significant number of others seem to be squirming in discomfort. I honestly did not know that such intense discomfort existed for Alon, and some others. Their open discussion of it is appreciated. I admire their courage to carry on and to search for solutions to soothe their discomfort. While I face similar prejudices from my immediate colleagues, I'm mainly excited by the cultural interactions and developments. I feel no need to justify my interests. I prefer to see CM in it's own setting within it's own rules and paradigms no matter where it's practiced. If the practitioner also has WM knowledge, that's great but shouldn't interfere with the genuine paradigm of CM and it's practice. If it comes to an American integrated practice, then China's current experience with it will no doubt be a source of information regarding its development here. Indeed, being genuine and holding one's ground is what's at issue. Emmanuel Segmen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 27, 2003 Report Share Posted March 27, 2003 Emmanuel, Indeed, being genuine and holding one's ground is what's at issue. > > Emmanuel Segmen Well put. The recent discussions about qi, Deke Kendall, mumbo jumbo, etc. revolve around a central theme: the meanings of words. The Confucian formula for both being genuine and holding one's ground is based upon listening to one's own inarticulate thoughts and providing " precise verbal definitions for the tones given off by the heart. " That's Pound's colorful way of interpreting the Confucian ideal, but I've always found it both clear and true to the spirit of the Chinese text. Nigel Wiseman calls language the neglected key, and that is another precise metaphor that cleaves to the heart of the matter. Everyone on this list has in his or her hands, this invaluable and sadly neglected key. All anyone has to do is pick it up, and it's theirs. The key to the genuine. The key to holding one's ground. Just imagine a community of students and professionals all possessed of a clear understanding of what the nomenclature of Chinese medicine meant when it was developed, has meant as it has been passed down through the generations, and continues to mean today...to those who bother to take possession of the key. Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 28, 2003 Report Share Posted March 28, 2003 , " dragon90405 " wrote: > Well put. The recent discussions about > qi, Deke Kendall, mumbo jumbo, etc. revolve around > a central theme: the meanings of words. >>> Ken: Will you add the definition of qi4 as " air " ---the contemporary biomedical use---to future editions of your book? Or just restrict the book to Chinese history? Jim Ramholz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 28, 2003 Report Share Posted March 28, 2003 Jim > > > Ken: > > Will you add the definition of qi4 as " air " ---the contemporary > biomedical use---to future editions of your book? Or just restrict > the book to Chinese history? > > > Jim Ramholz Not entirely sure what you mean. If you look in A Brief History of Qi the various definitions of qi relating to air and atmospheric phenomena are already included in the text. The whole last chapter is devoted to the appearance of qi in the vocabulary of daily life. But I may be missing your meaning, as I don't get exactly what you mean by " the contemporary biomedical use " . Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.