Paul Unschuld's unanswerable question

[Guest guest]

Marnae,

I appreciate your email below.

I imagine that most of us perceive the issues that lead you to write:

 

> All of this keeps bringing me back to PU's original " challenge " to

Ken et.

> al. I personally find the challenge itself quite problematized. If PU

> thinks that the medicine that we are representing as CM is " not

that " than

> what exactly is his referent when he refers to CM?

 

 

My response is that the challenge, on closer inspection, is not

'problematized' - that Unschuld is asking a necessary question, to

which there is no definite answer. It is necessary as a profession to

ask that question and explore the issue, to avoid the pitfalls of any

form of absolutism. A sense of absolutism pervaded much of the Western

practice of CM until possibly a few years ago. There are a number of

dangers with a sense of absolutism, of which one is the possibility of

political pressure for CM to conform to one standard.

 

The point of the questioning attitude, exemplified by Unschuld's

unasnwerable question, is that we are led to thinking things through

more profoundly, more historically, exploring the

philosophical/epistemological and anthropogical issues that pertain to

our field, and I think we have to accept the inevitable uncertainties

that accompanies this mature and responsible outlook.

 

Wainwright

 

 

 

 

 

> Jim -

>

> Just to clarify, it was I who first brought the Web into the

discussion - I

> listed it, along with Between Heaven & Earth, Misha's into to CM and

Ken's

> Who Can Ride the Dragon as the books that probably most inform the

public

> about what CM " is " .

[Guest guest]

At 11:09 AM +0000 10/17/03, wainwrightchurchill wrote:

>My response is that the challenge, on closer inspection, is not

>'problematized' - that Unschuld is asking a necessary question, to

>which there is no definite answer. It is necessary as a profession to

>ask that question and explore the issue, to avoid the pitfalls of any

>form of absolutism.

--

Wainwright,

 

I think you're on the right track here. I'd only add that as a

profession that relies heavily on the historical record for it's

sources, we need to account for this record as accurately as

possible, or at least without falsehood. To the extent that we fail

to do so, we will be seen to lack professional credibility.

 

>A sense of absolutism pervaded much of the Western

>practice of CM until possibly a few years ago. There are a number of

>dangers with a sense of absolutism, of which one is the possibility of

>political pressure for CM to conform to one standard.

--

However, I must say that this business of absolutism has not been my

experience, except in a few individuals. Perhaps I have been

fortunate in practicing in Berkeley, California, where there has been

such a wide range of styles, and local and visiting teachers with

such diverse backgrounds, that it would have been hard to maintain

" absolutism " . This diversity has always seemed very appealing and

exciting to me.

 

Do you have a sense of how extensive this problem is? Is it a big

enough problem that we have to take special steps? if so, what should

they be?

 

Rory

--

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Rory, Wainwright, et cie.,

 

Now that we agree on the importance

if not urgency of establishing a pattern

of more careful handling of the historical

aspect of our subject and professional

field, we should talk about how to

proceed.

 

I do believe that the issues related

to langugage and translation are

inescapable for anyone who is sincere

in a desire to make accurate representations

about the subject since the bulk of the literature

is in Chinese.

 

So this old topic cannot be set aside

simply because we've chewed it up

and spat it out a number of times.

 

As I've said, I'll be in San Diego at

the PCOM symposium next month.

I'll be available at the Redwing booth

much of the time, and anyone who

wants to get in touch can contact

me through the booth if I'm not

physically there.

 

I want to have at least one get together,

albeit an informal one, where we can

sit together and talk these things over.

 

I really think we need to get our

heads together and come up with

an approach that turns these sensibilities

into constructive actions.

 

And in the spirit of our new fearless

leader here in the Great Group Grope

of Caleeforniya, it would be nice to

proceed without the stain of politics

as usual.

 

But I doubt we're really capable of that.

 

So come with your armor.

 

Ken