Pluralism in CM

[Guest guest]

(Jason)Contrary to what many believe, there are some pretty radical

(non-TCM)

> approaches in CM that are quite effective. I've seen extremely hot

> herbs

> given to a patient that clearly fits a blood heat pattern in TCM,

> based on

> NeiJing. Kampo formulas also seem to contradict many times what one

> would

> believe to be true. With such a variety of thought, diagnostic, and

> treatment modalities in Chinese medicine I also wonder why people

> believe

> that all of these doctors trained in a myriad of ways from family

> lineages

> to high-powered hospitals (not to mention 2000 years of history)

> all speak

> the same language to describe their experience. This is completely

> mind-boggling to me, and the main reason I believe that plurality in

> translation is essential if one even remotely wants to capture

> something

> more than the basic TCM thought process and hence language. In my

> limited

> experience dealing with Chinese doctors, on the surface they may

> all use

> Chinese language terminology, but their meanings can be vastly

> different.

> Yin fire is example in which the dictionary nor my basic

> understanding is

> just wrong, only through context can one figure out that they are not

> talking about anything related to LDY. I could easy say to that

> person, " hey

> you are wrong, see right here in the dictionary it says yinfire

> means XYZ,

> why don't you speak correctly " or I can say " hhmmm. I wonder why

> he speaks

> about it that way, and what does he really mean, maybe I can learn

> something. " Obviously with the latter there becomes a terminological

> difference than the norm. I see this so often.

>

 

(Sharon) This is an excellent point. Isn't this the basic debate in

terminology issues whether to make A=B or to allow it to be

contextual? As a translator in the baby stage - I am in the

contextual camp as well as in the - it should read well - camp. In

my own work with case studies, one of the most interesting parts of

reading a variety of cases by one doctor and a variety of different

doctors cases is to start to see the way each doctor creates a

context, has a way of using language - either cryptic or verbose.

 

Sharon Weizenbaum

86 Henry Street

Amherst, MA 01002

413-549-4021

sweiz

www.whitepinehealingarts.com

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

(Z'ev) I agree with everything you say Jason, of course, but with the

caveat

that one must master a system before moving on. This thought comes

up a lot concerning the process of Chinese medical education in the

West, where I've seen too much exposure to alternative systems to TCM

creates confusion in the earlier stages. At PCOM, people are toying

with Worsley acupuncture seminars, for example. I also understand

that students sometimes get frustrated with the perceived dryness of

TCM, especially as befits acupuncture, and are looking for other

approaches. It has to be handled delicately. One thing I do know,

as Sharon has pointed out, is that most students and graduates cannot

properly do a TCM diagnosis on a patient, or any other associated

systematic approach. Something must be done to remedy this

situation so that new practitioners are not just using a cookbook

approach.

 

Yes, this is good Z'ev. I think it points to the purpose and

usefulness of FDM (Fundamental Diagnostic Method) as a ground work

for moving on. I also firmly believe that the " dryness " you speak of

that people feel with " TCM " is NOT because it is dry but because it's

depth is not contacted in the curriculum.

 

Sharon

 

 

Sharon Weizenbaum

86 Henry Street

Amherst, MA 01002

413-549-4021

sweiz

www.whitepinehealingarts.com