last time, oh lord.

[Guest guest]

Ken, Ken, Ken,

From talking to a friend who grew up in Macao, she said that it was a

wide open place at that time especially. People interested in China

flocked there to get as close to mainland China as possible. Many were

there to learn how to read and write Chinese. I don't know the truth

about this Institute but I could see why it wouldn't be known by the

Macau government. Or that they would care.

 

But more importantly, I know that one is not supposed to " get personal "

on these lists but I wonder if you have entertained the possibility

that you are wrong? No, no, not that you are asking the questions. Not

that PU has given you a valid line of inquiry. Not that your questions

are wrong. But simply that the way you are doing it, using these very

pages, to question someone's credentials is, as the Buddhists say, " not

skillful " . Posting in public these very serious innuendo is not

scholarship and I really object to that.

 

If Kaptchuk, O'Connor and Dan Bensky were in Macao slugging back beers

for 4 years I would be interested in hearing it. But I think this very

public questioning is not research. It is, at the least, not very

polite. And this is not quite the right forum. If you went on the Macao

list it might be appropriate. If Hsu, Scheid and PU had a forum it

might be but you asking us to be anthropologists and we are not. OK,

I'll amend that to say, I'm not an anthropologist.

 

It's not that I don't care but you haven't brought a shred of new

" evidence " only innuendo and yes, your passion, to this forum. My

thought is that I should go back to studying herbs and medicine and you

should research your research and get back to us when you have

something new to say. Sorry to be blunt. When you have something new

I'll consider it.

 

Now given the history, you are going to object to this and that, pick

at a phrase and a word, ask yet more questions...

 

I think it was Rory who said all of this could be asked in two

questions. If you had asked, " Does anyone know about the Macao

Institute? " that would have been fine. I'm sorry to get personal, it is

very hard to detect the tone of a writer on these lists. You don't seem

to mind being an " irritant " , in fact, you seem to revel in it. I would

respect you more as a writer if I saw you perusing your trade

skillfully.

 

doug

 

> Of course it seems impudent to

> inquire about someone's credentials.

> And those who have been around the

> field for a while recognize that the

> question of questionable degrees

> is a familiar one.

>

> So people get nervous whenever it

> comes up, and when people get nervous

> words like " inquisition " start to appear.

> __

> And in Web it is referred to as a " doctorate " .

> So which is it?

>

> Is that the inquisitional question?

>

> If you were looking at it, could you tell

> the difference between whether or not

> it says " diploma " or " doctorate " ?

>

> It may well be considered rude to ask.

>

> But which is it?