rigor

[Guest guest]

For myself, I think my comments are not about saying that New Ageism is bad in

itself. It's just as a teacher, there are a number of students who don't have

the skills

to do TCM as we try to teach it. I see them using other practices to hide their

deficiencies.

I agree with you and also Lucy about deeper consiousness. The goddess knows I

could use a little more of that too!

 

doug

 

 

 

, ra6151@a... wrote:

> Roger,

>

> I WILL take the time to read your articles. i want to see what you have to

> say at length. But a question has come up for me as I've read the last few

> days' posts. What do people really mean when they say 'new age'? Do you

really

> mean 'multiculturalism' or 'political correctness' when you say 'new age-ism'?

>

> Perhaps I am wrong, but I thought that 'new-age thought' in general wanted to

> lead people to more inner awareness and a deeper responsibility to self and

> world - a shift in consciousness. I'm not a new-age devotee, so please don't

> think I'm trying to defend myself here. And I know 'new-age' stuff can get

> creepy and shallow and lead to fuzzy thinking. But I'm wondering if people

> aren't scapegoating all things 'new age'. After all , the multi-national

> pharmaceutical corporations you mention in your post hardly put forth 'new

age'

ideas,

> do they?

>

> -roseanne s.

[Guest guest]

I agree that there should be greater academic rigor in our schools. And I agree

that

" New Age " practices are not a part (or should not be a part) of TCM, but I am

uncomfortable

with your description ot two routes, either Westernize or hide in New Ageism.

Many schools

seem to keep adding Western science or Western Medical classes and yet students

still don't

learn how to think or diagnose in a TCM model.

 

Sheila

 

 

Re: rigor

 

I don't think its always a matter of academic ability although yes many times it

is. Its

just that some people " get " the medicine and some don't. Some will try to

Westernize

the medicine while others will forever hide in New Ageisms.

 

 

 

 

 

, Rory Kerr <rorykerr@o...> wrote:

> At 2:52 PM +0000 5/29/04, wrote:

> >I see that students really don't have a good idea of what Chinese

> >Medicine encompasses when they enter. (This was true for myself as

> >well). Many come in of an interest vaguely in the culture through

> >martial arts or in the New Age and come out with an appreciation of

> >the depth of the Medicine. They become Doctors with all its

> >responsibilities. The problematic students don't understand that and

> >remain committed to the New Age and what many of us see as the

> >periphery of the medicine.

> --

> Doug,

>

> Do you see a correlation between lower academic ability and

> new-agism, as Bob seemed to suggest?

>

> My observation has been that they are not necessarily related. Early

> on in the development of English language programs I think there was

> very little literature available, and quite problematic teaching. I

> think many felt a need for answers to real clinical problems for

> which their training didn't prepare them, and so sought those answers

> outside Chinese medicine because it was not obvious that answers were

> available within it, and yet they seemed compatible. Some of those

> people developed a " successful " style of practice and a belief system

> based on their experience, and are unwilling to do the work of

> reeducating themselves. Some of these people teach and are

> charismatic, and therefore develop followers amongst the uncritical.

>

> Oh dear! Now Todd will not be alone in having upset some people.

>

> Rory

> --

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Sorry, I didn't write that very well. I meant to say that for those who don't

understand

TCM, they tend to hide either behind Western or New Age rationale.

I would say that some of my best students have been MD's. They seem comfortable

with the Western paradigm and can clearly differenciate what TCM has to offer.

And

on the other hand, bringing a personal/spiritual perspective can only help. The

problem is with those who try to work through their spiritual ideas through TCM.

I agree with what you say about the addition of Western classes.

doug

 

 

, Sheila White <she-rahk@e...> wrote:

> I agree that there should be greater academic rigor in our schools. And I

agree that

> " New Age " practices are not a part (or should not be a part) of TCM, but I am

uncomfortable

> with your description ot two routes, either Westernize or hide in New Ageism.

Many schools

> seem to keep adding Western science or Western Medical classes and yet

students

still don't

> learn how to think or diagnose in a TCM model.

>

> Sheila

>

>

> Re: rigor

>

> I don't think its always a matter of academic ability although yes many times

it is.

Its

> just that some people " get " the medicine and some don't. Some will try to

Westernize

> the medicine while others will forever hide in New Ageisms.

>

>

>

>

>

> , Rory Kerr <rorykerr@o...> wrote:

> > At 2:52 PM +0000 5/29/04, wrote:

> > >I see that students really don't have a good idea of what Chinese

> > >Medicine encompasses when they enter. (This was true for myself as

> > >well). Many come in of an interest vaguely in the culture through

> > >martial arts or in the New Age and come out with an appreciation of

> > >the depth of the Medicine. They become Doctors with all its

> > >responsibilities. The problematic students don't understand that and

> > >remain committed to the New Age and what many of us see as the

> > >periphery of the medicine.

> > --

[Guest guest]

At 12:14 PM -0700 5/30/04, Sheila White wrote:

>Many schools seem to keep adding Western science or Western Medical

>classes and yet students still don't learn how to think or diagnose

>in a TCM model.

--

Sheila,

 

These two things should be considered separately. The reasons for

including biomedicine have nothing to do with the difficulties of

learning TCM. Learning to practice Chinese medicine effectively is

not easy and takes time and experience; more time and experience than

is offered in most programs. One benefit of an entry level OM

doctorate will, I hope, be a much longer clinical training under more

qualified supervisors.

 

Rory

--

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

This is one of the things that led to the demise of the Eclectics. This

school was most popular when following its own path and incorporating much

that we would today call new age technique. It their declining years they

began to believe that their survival depended upon showing competence in

regular medical theories. Thus they started incorporating more and more

western medical or regular academia into their curriculum. Ultimately they

failed at proficiency to either tradition. Their doom was sealed when they

allowed themselves to be measured by proficiency in regular medical

tradition. Their student and schools simply did not have the ability to

show the level of competence that the regular schools and students did.

History demonstrates that acupuncturists should be careful in defining what

they are as a medical profession. If acupuncturists define themselves in

terms of western medical curriculum, then acupuncturists must measure up to

that standard. If they fall short, the mainstream medical establishment

will use those shortcomings to destroy the profession.

 

 

 

Barry

 

 

 

_____

 

Sheila White [she-rahk]

 

 

 

I agree that there should be greater academic rigor in our schools. And I

agree that

" New Age " practices are not a part (or should not be a part) of TCM, but I

am uncomfortable

with your description ot two routes, either Westernize or hide in New

Ageism. Many schools

seem to keep adding Western science or Western Medical classes and yet

students still don't

learn how to think or diagnose in a TCM model.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

If this is what Todd was saying, Bob, I am in total agreement. I do think

that there has to also be a " research " arm of our profession to look into

promising possibilities such as Acutonics and NAET in a NEUTRAL fashion. While

these

things may be difficult to believe, so was acupuncture for many. Perhaps a

symposia specifically for looking into such things is in the future, so as to

affirm theories that work and to make obvious the failings fo those that do not.

I have heard positive empirical results and both these things have " matured "

to a point where there is either enough empirical evidence, or similar proof

thru a more objective evidence based research in smaller numbers of cases.

Rational thought does not throw out that which seems irrational without deeper

inquiry first.

DAvid Molony

 

In a message dated 5/28/04 11:45:06 AM, pemachophel2001 writes:

 

 

> I may be wrong, but what I think Todd is saying is that this

> profession needs to decide whether we are a secular profession

> providing health care in a multicultural milieu based on rational

> principles and discourse, outcomes-based research, and a sound

> knowledge of our historical development. Forget the word " science. "

> That's a red herring. Are we/do we want to become a mature secular

> health care profession, or are we a New Age spiritual path? (This is

> not the same debate as the Confucian concern over whether medicine is

> a big or little Dao.)

>

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

When I criticize " New Age " thinking, I am not including the following:

intuition

recognition that there are things that science cannot yet explain

an idea of spirit in medicine

 

I can see that from the comments on this list, that the lack of critical

thinking and knee-jerk metaphysical dogma that I see as a problem may be unique

to America. " New Age " has become a commercialized package that comes complete

with its own special marketing gimmicks. While the New Age gives lip service to

the items in the above list, it often does so in ways that reject reason and

common sense.

 

I agree with the below. I have had MDs as students and because of their clinical

and practical experience in medicine, " can clearly differentiate what TCM has to

offer " , as Doug says.

 

Many non-MD, New-Age types tend to see TCM as a religion whose dogma appeals to

them.

 

I hope this clarifies.

 

---Roger Wicke, PhD, TCM Clinical Herbalist

contact: www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/

Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute, Hot Springs, Montana USA

Clinical herbology training programs - www.rmhiherbal.org

 

 

==========

 

" "

Re: rigor

 

>I meant to say that for those who don't understand

TCM, they tend to hide either behind Western or New Age rationale.

I would say that some of my best students have been MD's. They seem comfortable

with the Western paradigm and can clearly differenciate what TCM has to offer.

And

on the other hand, bringing a personal/spiritual perspective can only help. The

problem is with those who try to work through their spiritual ideas through TCM.

I agree with what you say about the addition of Western classes.

doug

 

 

---Roger Wicke, PhD, TCM Clinical Herbalist

contact: www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/

Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute, Hot Springs, Montana USA

Clinical herbology training programs - www.rmhiherbal.org

[Guest guest]

Roger,

Sorry for the late reply and 'reemergence', but bounced my

e-mails again. . .

speaking of sloppy thinking! Why does continue to avoid fixing

these problems?

 

I was glad to see your comments, as I've argued until 'blue in the

face' that increasing

the quantity of information to memorize will not improve the ability

for new graduates to

diagnose and treat patients. Wisdom comes through the ability to

practice, gain

experience, and use one's mind and body to understand, live and

synthesize a discipline

and its associated body of knowledge.

We must teach ourselves and our students how to think. This is

why I think that

removing philosophy from the cirriculi of our major academic

institutions was a major

historical error (see 'The Closing of the American Mind' by Bloom on

this subject).

Philosophy is the art and science of learning how to think and reason.

Since TCM pattern recognition is based on rules of logic, as you

point out, the core of

Chinese medical education must be learning how to apply this logic to

clinical problems,

from simple cases at first to those of increasing complexity. My own

students have no

problem in approaching new data, it is problem solving that is

difficult for them.

Paul Unschuld would agree with you on the subject of how

biomedical physicians have

lost control of their knowledge base, and therefore their

professional status has been

greatly weakened in the last 100 years. We don't have that problem in

our profession, at

least in the West (the co-option of our knowledge base). Our problem

is that we haven't

even begun to tap our knowledge base in a meaningful way. If we

cannot guarantee

coherency in our own knowledge base, the CM profession cannot

progress.

I would enjoy discussing these ideas with you at more length and

depth.

 

 

 

 

, rw2@r... wrote:

> Within just the past 14 years, I have witnessed a dramatic decline

in educational ability

among American students. Few college graduates are capable of basic

deductive

reasoning. TCM pattern recognition skills depend directly on basic

rules of logic - given a

list of symptoms, what are the possibilities, how do we differentiate

them, and when do we

have enough evidence to make a decision? Many people no longer have

these abilities. No

amount of memorizing will remedy these deficiencies. I see many of

the accredited

schools attempt to distract from this stark fact by padding the

curriculum with lots of

impressive academic subjects - " doctoral " programs, even! However, a

long list of

memorized facts does not equate to wisdom. This is what happened to

allopathic medicine

in the early 20th century. The medical college accrediting and

funding agencies actually

demanded that the practical core courses of botany, phytochemistry,

and clinical

herbalism be removed from the curriculum so as to make doctors

dependent on the

synthetic chemical industry. Their academic, social, and financial

status was improved to

distract them from their new status as servants of the pharmaceutical

companies.

>

>

> Many of the recommendations are based on my observation that the

cultural decline is

much worse within the US than any other industrialized nation. I do

not see a solution

originating within the American TCM community, as the decline has

proceeded too far and

for too long. Most of my new students are foreigners, many of them

MDs; they have a

totally different perspective and a healthy enthusiasm for learning.

If this situation is to be

turned around, we need to look to foreigners for assistance. The

cultural rot within our

own country, like a metastasizing tumor, may have proceeded so far

that the patient needs

outside intervention. If foreign assistance fails to help, then I

will retreat into a monastic

community of my own creation. Anyone care to join me?

>

>

>

> ---Roger Wicke, PhD, TCM Clinical Herbalist

[Guest guest]

Here is a quote, attributed to the Buddha (but who knows where it really came

from originally):

 

" Believe nothing which is unreasonable and reject nothing as

unreasonable without proper examination. "

 

I include this quote in the beginning of the textbooks I use for my TCM

herbology classes.

Over the years, I've had clients who have claimed to have been abducted by

UFO's, been victims of microwave mind-control, can hear and see beings that

others cannot. To me the quote above represents the ideal attitude that a

scientist should take. This was the attitude of some of the best scientists I

studied and worked with. It is unfair to ask us all to begin divvying up the

intellectual territory into " science " and " heresy " , whether Acutonics, mind

control, acupuncture, NAET, applied kinesiology, etc. That in itself is a

mindset of religious dogma.

 

However, that said, I have found that many of my students who are trained in the

scientific method of inquiry have a healthier balance between open-mindedness

and skepticism than do many who have no scientific training, but only a lot of

exposure to New Age dogma. The latter are often quicker to accept or reject

without proper examination.

 

There is also a great difference between teaching the scientific method of

inquiry and teaching scientism. Much of what is taught in medical schools, and

now in TCM colleges, are factoids taught by rote. In 20 years, these factoids

may even be altered or disproven. How will devotees of scientism be able to

fathom this process? These people will be as helpless as the New Agers.

 

Regarding the teaching of TCM herbology, topics like phytochemistry, scientific

research methodology, and botany I see as valuable **supplements** to the core

curriculum of symptom-sign pattern recognition and matching of herbs and

formulae based on these criteria. Anything that pretends to replace these

methods with scientistic methods is a mistake, because these procedures **do**

have the attributes of a scientific methodology:

 

(1) They are repeatable and can be tested, and have.

(2) They follow an internally consistent logic.

(3) TCM herbalists worldwide seem to agree on the basic details.

(4) The method has predictive abilities - new herbs, such as saw

palmetto, are being incorporated by many TCM herbalists with good results, based

upon the same process of estimating herbal properties, then observing the

clinical results for consistency with these ideas.

 

 

---Roger Wicke, PhD, TCM Clinical Herbalist

contact: www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/

Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute, Hot Springs, Montana USA

Clinical herbology training programs - www.rmhiherbal.org

 

 

 

>acuman1

>Re: Re: rigor

>

>If this is what Todd was saying, Bob, I am in total agreement. I do think

>that there has to also be a " research " arm of our profession to look into

>promising possibilities such as Acutonics and NAET in a NEUTRAL fashion. While

these

>things may be difficult to believe, so was acupuncture for many. Perhaps a

>symposia specifically for looking into such things is in the future, so as to

>affirm theories that work and to make obvious the failings fo those that do

not.

>I have heard positive empirical results and both these things have " matured "

>to a point where there is either enough empirical evidence, or similar proof

>thru a more objective evidence based research in smaller numbers of cases.

>Rational thought does not throw out that which seems irrational without deeper

>inquiry first.

>DAvid Molony

 

 

---Roger Wicke, PhD, TCM Clinical Herbalist

contact: www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/

Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute, Hot Springs, Montana USA

Clinical herbology training programs - www.rmhiherbal.org

[Guest guest]

Roger,

 

Interesting reply. I'm going to look for Asimov's Foundation Trilogy

and give it a read. Sounds interesting. I'll also give your articles a

look-see. I've promosed my wife we could build and off-the-grid house

within the next five years. Your reading of history makes this sound

like a good idea. As for the monastic thing, been there, done that.

Has it's own inherent problems. In any case, bottom line, I also see

no real possibility of changing the TCM siutation in this country,

and, like you, I enjoy/find more gartifying teaching European MDs

better than American acupuncturists.

 

Bob

[Guest guest]

However, that said, I have found that many of my students who are trained in the

scientific method of inquiry have a healthier balance between open-mindedness

and skepticism than do many who have no scientific training, but only a lot of

exposure to New Age dogma. The latter are often quicker to accept or reject

without proper examination.

>>>I agree and that is why we need it in TCM education

alon