Kendall

[Guest guest]

Does anybody know were Donald Kendall got much of his neijing translations and some other information that he does not clearly ref? his translations make much of the systems of CM sound like you are reading a modern anatomy and physiology text. Doe he translate his own materials? or does he give himself much latitude in interpretations?

 

I have only read the first 59 pg or so but some of the detail in so-called neijing physiology and anatomy are unlike anything I have seen in the past.

He definitely has some different conclusions about circulation for example than Unschuld. Fascinating reading however.

 

Alon

 

[Guest guest]

Alon,

I've just began reading his (D. Kendall's) book as well. I took a

class with him 15 years ago, and he would translate himself and apply

anatomical/physiological information to his translation.

 

By the way, nowhere in the book (Dao of ) does it say

that qi or channels don't exist. He just interprets these phenomena

physiologically.

 

I am also reading Unschuld's Nei Jing book at the same time and

comparing their conclusions about channels, qi and viscera-bowels. A

very interesting project, reading both books. However, I'd have to say

that while Deke is very sharp with his anatomy/physiology, Unschuld in

my book wins hands down for access to resources on the Nei Jing to

support his statements and conclusions.

 

 

On Friday, August 1, 2003, at 03:19 PM, ALON MARCUS wrote:

 

> Does anybody know were Donald Kendall got much of his neijing

> translations and some other information that he does not clearly ref?

> his translations make much of the systems of CM sound like you are

> reading a modern anatomy and physiology text. Doe he translate his own

> materials? or does he give himself much latitude in interpretations?

>  

> I have only read the first 59 pg or so but some of the detail in

> so-called neijing physiology and anatomy are unlike anything I have

> seen in the past.

>  

> He definitely has some different conclusions about circulation for

> example than Unschuld. Fascinating reading however.

>  

> Alon

>  

>

<image.tiff>

>

>

> 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]

However, I'd have to say that while Deke is very sharp with his anatomy/physiology, Unschuld in my book wins hands down for access to resources on the Nei Jing to support his statements and conclusions.>>>>>I am doing the same thing reading both books at the same time. I does sound however that Deke believes that the channels are the blood vessels. My vascular anatomy is not good enough to know how accurate his statements are. I will need to study is further. Certainly Unshuld does not believe that the neijing support the ideas of continuous blood circulation as does Deke.

 

By the way, nowhere in the book (Dao of ) does it say that qi or channels don't exist. He just interprets these phenomena physiologically. >>>He does state that qi is mostly "air".

 

Alon

[Guest guest]

, " " wrote:

> I am also reading Unschuld's Nei Jing book at the same time and

> comparing their conclusions about channels, qi and viscera-bowels.

A very interesting project, reading both books. >>>

 

 

Z'ev:

 

You're much braver than I am. I tried reading " Nothingness: The

Science of Empty Space " by Henning Genz, " The End of Certainty " by

the physicist Ilya Prigogine, and " The Illusion of Conscious Will "

by David Wegner at the same time and couldn't account for three days!

 

How do you resolve the two incompatible viewpoints of these books--

or can you?

 

 

Jim Ramholz

[Guest guest]

, " ALON MARCUS " <

alonmarcus@w...> wrote:

 

I does sound however that Deke believes that the channels are the blood

vessels.

 

that has also has been my impressionin articles he has writtenand talks he has

given

 

[Guest guest]

I does sound however that Deke believes that the channels are the blood vessels. that has also has been my impression articles he has writtenand talks he has given<<<<And since i cant read the chinese it is difficult for me to judge some of his translation of neijing. He adds small changes in terms as compared to others, that make some of his assertions look possible. Many of his ideas are quite interesting and would definitely be more in line with known anatomy.

Alon

[Guest guest]

I don't think they are so incompatible. They are both basically

interpreting the Nei Jing. One a Chinese language and cultural

scholar, the other an engineer. They are different viewpoints on the

same material, and both are trying to 'demystify' the subject. It just

appears that Paul Unschuld has a much broader palate and access to

resource material than Deke Kendall does.

 

 

On Friday, August 1, 2003, at 08:33 PM, James Ramholz wrote:

 

> Z'ev:

>

> You're much braver than I am. I tried reading " Nothingness: The

> Science of Empty Space " by Henning Genz, " The End of Certainty " by

> the physicist Ilya Prigogine, and " The Illusion of Conscious Will "

> by David Wegner at the same time and couldn't account for three days!

>

> How do you resolve the two incompatible viewpoints of these books--

> or can you?

[Guest guest]

, " " wrote:

> I don't think they are so incompatible. They are both basically

> interpreting the Nei Jing. One a Chinese language and cultural

> scholar, the other an engineer. They are different viewpoints on

the same material, and both are trying to 'demystify' the subject.

It just appears that Paul Unschuld has a much broader palate and

access to resource material than Deke Kendall does. >>>

 

 

Z'ev:

 

It seems like the current trend--with even the NCCAOM requiring

biomedical credits for their Dipl OM--is that this information will

slowly replace the historical view as the dominant way of thinking.

 

 

Jim Ramholz

[Guest guest]

While I don't have a problem with people studying biomedicine for any

reason, I think the current emphasis in the West is from a continuing

lack of access to and understanding of the Chinese medical literature.

As I've pointed out many times, with a flick of the mouse one can

access mountains of biomedical data, but Chinese medical data is a

pittance on the internet, unless one knows Chinese. Furthermore, we

are steeped in Western scientific and medical thinking, it is all over

and around us in the media, whereas the logic of Chinese medicine and

pattern differentiation requires arduous practice and training in a

very different way of looking at medicine and even life. This is why

I think studying such texts as the Shang Han Lun and Nan Jing is so

important. And why one should struggle to try to understand these

texts on their own terms as much as is possible. Otherwise, we will

end up with the husk without the fruit inside. There are good

translations of both these texts available, and both have access to the

Chinese.

 

 

On Saturday, August 2, 2003, at 09:40 PM, James Ramholz wrote:

 

> Z'ev:

>

> It seems like the current trend--with even the NCCAOM requiring

> biomedical credits for their Dipl OM--is that this information will

> slowly replace the historical view as the dominant way of thinking.

>

>

> Jim Ramholz

[Guest guest]

, " " wrote:

> While I don't have a problem with people studying biomedicine for

any reason, I think the current emphasis in the West is from a

continuing lack of access to and understanding of the Chinese

medical literature. >>>

 

 

Z'ev:

 

The current emphasis is really due to the cultural disposition.

 

I think it's really up to the next generation. I do hope more of the

younger students learn Chinese and make this profession more

scholarly. But unless one is early in their life and career they

will probably not learn Chinese with sufficient proficiency to be

more than adequate for modern texts; and will miss most of the

history, subtleties, and nuances of the classics.

 

The same is true for pulse diagnosis. Unless one begins the very

first day, real skill is difficult to acquire.

 

 

Jim Ramholz

[Guest guest]

is why I think studying such texts as the Shang Han Lun and Nan Jing is so important. And why one should struggle to try to understand these texts on their own terms as much as is possible.

>>>>Does it have to be premodern texts? Perhaps? I also think its important to be able to shift hats between ways of thinking.To be a good practitioner it is important to understand both CM and WM

[Guest guest]

Of course what you say is correct, Jim, but one has to start where one

is, today. Not give up. I didn't start studying medical Chinese until

seven years ago, and it has already shown me benefit. I think

developing one's pulse skills will also give increasing gains, no

matter what stage one's practice is in.

 

What concerns me are practitioners' associations and national

commissions determining the course load for future CM practitioners,

recommending increasing biomedical courses, but not really increasing

the depth or detail of Chinese medical courses such as diagnostics,

pattern differentiation, internal medicine, and of course medical

Chinese. We shouldn't bias our profession into a 'biomedical jr.'

future.

 

 

On Sunday, August 3, 2003, at 08:56 AM, James Ramholz wrote:

 

> , " " wrote:

>> While I don't have a problem with people studying biomedicine for

> any reason, I think the current emphasis in the West is from a

> continuing lack of access to and understanding of the Chinese

> medical literature. >>>

>

>

> Z'ev:

>

> The current emphasis is really due to the cultural disposition.

>

> I think it's really up to the next generation. I do hope more of the

> younger students learn Chinese and make this profession more

> scholarly. But unless one is early in their life and career they

> will probably not learn Chinese with sufficient proficiency to be

> more than adequate for modern texts; and will miss most of the

> history, subtleties, and nuances of the classics.

>

> The same is true for pulse diagnosis. Unless one begins the very

> first day, real skill is difficult to acquire.

>

>

> Jim Ramholz

>

>

>

>

 

[Guest guest]

I agree with you, Alon. But the new proposals from both practitioner

associations and national commissions heavily biases the biomedical

component, in my opinion.

 

 

On Sunday, August 3, 2003, at 09:58 AM, Alon Marcus wrote:

 

> is why

> I think studying such texts as the Shang Han Lun and Nan Jing is so

> important.  And why one should struggle to try to understand these

> texts on their own terms as much as is possible. 

> >>>>Does it have to be premodern texts? Perhaps? I also think its

> important to be able to shift hats between ways of thinking.To be a

> good practitioner it is important to understand both CM and WM

>

[Guest guest]

What concerns me are practitioners' associations and national commissions determining the course load for future CM practitioners, recommending increasing biomedical courses, but not really increasing the depth or detail of Chinese medical courses such as diagnostics, pattern differentiation, internal medicine, and of course medical Chinese. We shouldn't bias our profession into a 'biomedical jr.' future.>>>>We need both

Alon

[Guest guest]

I agree with you, Alon. But the new proposals from both practitioner associations and national commissions heavily biases the biomedical component, in my opinion.>>>>When i was talking about modern i am talking CM literature, not biomedical. The biomedical component should be clinical and is very important. What we need is a program that is much more like the Chinese model i.e. has a lot more of both

Alon

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 8/1/2003 3:26:27 PM Pacific Daylight Time, zrosenbe writes:

 

 

Alon,

I've just began reading his (D. Kendall's) book as well. I took a class with him 15 years ago, and he would translate himself and apply anatomical/physiological information to his translation.

 

By the way, nowhere in the book (Dao of ) does it say that qi or channels don't exist. He just interprets these phenomena physiologically.

 

I am also reading Unschuld's Nei Jing book at the same time and comparing their conclusions about channels, qi and viscera-bowels. A very interesting project, reading both books. However, I'd have to say that while Deke is very sharp with his anatomy/physiology, Unschuld in my book wins hands down for access to resources on the Nei Jing to support his statements and conclusions.

 

 

Z'ev -

I have also been studying both texts in anticipation of spending some time with Professor Unschuld in August. I also had that class with Deke at Emperor's. The book is a culmination of his thesis. We must be cautious of using translational opinion to drive legislative and regulatory agency agenda. That is occurring with the new accreditation commission; they are using Deke's model as the basis for a scientific approach to OM.

 

best regards,

 

Will

[Guest guest]

I agree 100% about the dangers of taking one point of view and turning

it into a political agenda.

 

 

On Monday, August 4, 2003, at 07:39 PM, WMorris116 wrote:

 

> Z'ev -

>

> I have also been studying both texts in anticipation of spending some

> time with Professor Unschuld in August. I also had that class with

> Deke at Emperor's. The book is a culmination of his thesis. We must be

> cautious of using translational opinion to drive legislative and

> regulatory agency agenda. That is occurring with the new accreditation

> commission; they are using Deke's model as the basis for a scientific

> approach to OM.

>

> best regards,

>

> Will

[Guest guest]

, " " wrote:

they are using Deke's model as the basis for a scientific approach

to OM. >>>

 

 

Will:

 

The attitude of some medical acupuncturists I've spoken to seems to

be that they are rescuing OM from the mythic and metaphysical

trappings, and giving it the scientific grounding that it is

actually inherent in it.

 

 

Jim Ramholz

[Guest guest]

" The attitude of some medical acupuncturists I've spoken to seems to

be that they are rescuing OM from the mythic and metaphysical

trappings, and giving it the scientific grounding that it is

actually inherent in it. "

 

 

Jim Ramholz

 

You seem to place much confidence in the " grounding " of science. However,

there are those who see in science exactly the opposite. For example, look

at the hypothesis. In testing one hypothesis other hypotheses inevitably

occur. Painfully we realize that the testing and confirming of hypotheses

only leads to more hypotheses. Hence more confusion. Some on this list

have lamented that science is out of control. Perhaps that is the nature of

science.

 

As Robert Pirsig stated:

 

" If the purpose of scientific method is to select from among a multitude of

hypotheses, and if the number of hypotheses grows faster than experimental

method can handle, then it is clear that all hypotheses can never be tested.

If all hypotheses cannot be tested, then the results of any experiment are

inconclusive and the entire scientific method falls short of its goal of

establishing proven knowledge. "

 

This is just a thought on the thread of science needing guidance.

 

I also want to add that I once worked in quality control and was closely

involved in testing of materials. I found that I could send samples of the

same material to multiple accredited labs and get differing results from

each (sometimes widely different results). If I told the lab the control

limits I would be more likely to get the results within limits (granted this

is an assumption- but I believe it to be true). If I got results that were

out of tolerance, I could always send the material to another lab and get an

" in-tolerance " result. So we must be very careful about how we interpret

lab measurement results. They can potentially lead away from the good

results practitioners see every dayt using the time tested knowledge of TCM.

 

Barry Thorne

 

 

 

> " James Ramholz " <jramholz

>

>

> Re: Kendall

>Tue, 05 Aug 2003 07:19:19 -0000

>

 

_______________

Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online

http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963

 

 

 

, " " wrote:

they are using Deke's model as the basis for a scientific approach

to OM. >>>

 

 

Will:

 

The attitude of some medical acupuncturists I've spoken to seems to

be that they are rescuing OM from the mythic and metaphysical

trappings, and giving it the scientific grounding that it is

actually inherent in it.

 

 

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.

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

--- In

, " "

wrote:

they are using Deke's model as the basis for a scientific approach

to OM. >>>

 

At 7:19 AM +0000 8/5/03, James

Ramholz wrote:

 

The attitude of some medical

acupuncturists I've spoken to seems to

be that they are rescuing OM from the mythic and

metaphysical

trappings, and giving it the

scientific grounding that it is

actually inherent in

it.

--

 

What do they mean by " giving it the scientific grounding

that is actually inherent in it " ? If it's inherent they wouldn't

have to give it. Sounds like gobbledygook.

 

Rory

--

[Guest guest]

We must be cautious of using translational opinion to drive legislative and regulatory agency agenda. That is occurring with the new accreditation commission; they are using Deke's model as the basis for a scientific approach to OM. >>>>Did you get any opinion on the accurateness of his translations?

Alon

[Guest guest]

In an interesting example of synchronicity, I was just speaking with Ken Rose today about exactly this quote from Zen and the art of Motorcycle Maintenance. Even though we're all sitting at computers at various corners of the earth, there seem to be other connections that occasionally happen. In fact, reading this quote got me started on the thought pattern that generated my previous post.

 

apologies for the triple-posting.

JDR

 

 

 

As Robert Pirsig stated:"If the purpose of scientific method is to select from among a multitude of hypotheses, and if the number of hypotheses grows faster than experimental method can handle, then it is clear that all hypotheses can never be tested. If all hypotheses cannot be tested, then the results of any experiment are inconclusive and the entire scientific method falls short of its goal of establishing proven knowledge."Jason Robertson, L.Ac. Ju Er Hu Tong 19 Hao Yuan 223 Shi Beijing, Peoples Republic of China

home-86-010-8405-0531cell- 86-010-13520155800

 

 

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 8/5/2003 11:08:31 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

alonmarcus writes:

 

> >>>>Did you get any opinion on the accurateness of his

> translations?

 

Alon -

 

 

None other than the discussion here. I think it is a useful consideration.

However in my opinion, there is more to the Nei Jing than the anatomical model

Deke suggests.

 

best thoughts -

 

Will

[Guest guest]

Barry,

 

I regard your comments on lab results to be the single most important post for the last while regarding Western science. As a QA guy, you get to take a close pulse on lab work. As a lab worker, I have been able to control for many variables using the same lots of sample and the same lots of standards for all results. The results and their interpretation can be virtually anything you want it to be. There is a lab "culture" that brings about repeatable results within the mythos of the science. That is, I know how to get things to move a certain way. That said, commercial lab results are variable and subject to economic, social and political influence.

 

Also the evolution of technology will bring us more powerful machinery. But will we be a step closer to homeostatic balance? In this regard CM can "see" the balance better than WM can. In the year 1900 4% of America was obese. Now in 2003 the most conservative estimates of medical obesity in America is over 20%. Technology has its merits and its problems. It is not my view that technology has made our culture superior in a manner other than to do with military superiority and with commerce. The New Guinea indigenous people refer to us Westerners as having more "cargo". We strap on tons of SUV steel to go to the corner to buy some groceries. For what ever benefits accrue from technology, we have to carry a lot of cargo.

 

Emmanuel Segmen

 

 

-

BARRY THORNE

Tuesday, August 05, 2003 4:25 AM

Re: Re: Kendall

"The attitude of some medical acupuncturists I've spoken to seems tobe that they are rescuing OM from the mythic and metaphysicaltrappings, and giving it the scientific grounding that it isactually inherent in it. "Jim RamholzYou seem to place much confidence in the "grounding" of science. However, there are those who see in science exactly the opposite. For example, look at the hypothesis. In testing one hypothesis other hypotheses inevitably occur. Painfully we realize that the testing and confirming of hypotheses only leads to more hypotheses. Hence more confusion. Some on this list have lamented that science is out of control. Perhaps that is the nature of science.As Robert Pirsig stated:"If the purpose of scientific method is to select from among a multitude of hypotheses, and if the number of hypotheses grows faster than experimental method can handle, then it is clear that all hypotheses can never be tested. If all hypotheses cannot be tested, then the results of any experiment are inconclusive and the entire scientific method falls short of its goal of establishing proven knowledge."This is just a thought on the thread of science needing guidance.I also want to add that I once worked in quality control and was closely involved in testing of materials. I found that I could send samples of the same material to multiple accredited labs and get differing results from each (sometimes widely different results). If I told the lab the control limits I would be more likely to get the results within limits (granted this is an assumption- but I believe it to be true). If I got results that were out of tolerance, I could always send the material to another lab and get an "in-tolerance" result. So we must be very careful about how we interpret lab measurement results. They can potentially lead away from the good results practitioners see every dayt using the time tested knowledge of TCM.Barry Thorne>"James Ramholz" <jramholz> > > Re: Kendall>Tue, 05 Aug 2003 07:19:19 -0000>_______________Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963The 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]

, " BARRY THORNE " wrote:

You seem to place much confidence in the " grounding " of science.

However, there are those who see in science exactly the opposite.

For example, look at the hypothesis. In testing one hypothesis other

hypotheses inevitably occur. Painfully we realize that the testing

and confirming of hypotheses only leads to more hypotheses. Hence

more confusion. Some on this list have lamented that science is out

of control. Perhaps that is the nature of science. >>>

 

 

Barry:

 

I understand the point you are making and agree. I was trying to

depict the attitude and rationalization I found.

 

 

Jim Ramholz