Greetings, everyone, I have a physician in NYC who I visit occassionally. He is both a (western) MD and a doctor of Chinese medicine. He views them as complementary: sometimes he uses the practices of one, and at other times the practices of the other. This includes acupuncture, acupressure. His wife is an herbal/Chinese doctor, and sometimes some of that is used, as well.
Cheers, Lawry On Jan 9, 2011, at 10:56 PM, Keith Hudson wrote: > You're not seriously proposing acupuncture are you? Even the Chinese scarcely > use it as a practical system! > > Acupuncture was a great discovery in that it indicated that there are > neuronal "gates" in our bodies which, if over-stimulated, can block pain. > (Scratching ourselves when we feel an itch is an instinctive -- and effective > -- use of this phenomenon.) It can work, too, for some quite awe inspiring > surgical operations in the case of patients who believe deeply in it very > deeply -- virtual hypnosis. But if it's the "arrogance of our [the West's] > scientific society and the need for the present medical/pharmaceutical > businesses to maintain their grip on the lucrative resource at hand" why > didn't the Chinese use acupuncture more widely long ago? > > They didn't because acupuncture has only very limited uses. Instead, the > Chinese long ago used various natural products to bring about anaesthesia for > serious operations, just as monastic hospitals did in Medieval Europe. > > Keith > > > At 11:27 09/01/2011 -0800, Darryl wrote: >> Add to the list below the study of the energy flows of the body and >> acupuncture to treat dis-eases of the body (over 3500 years of use). This >> style of medical intervention is still little understood by the western >> world partly due to the arrogance of our scientific society and the need for >> the present medical/pharmaceutical businesses to maintain their grip on the >> lucrative resource at hand. Let's mention as well the vast knowledge of the >> ancient Chinese of the medicinals of the natural world and the Chinese >> achievements in astronomy. >> >> The struggle to 'achieve' in anything (sports, technocracy, >> business/economics, government, etc.) can lead to a blind arrogance toward >> other aspects within a field or society or toward other cultures. It is this >> unacceptance of 'differing ways and values' that can lead to >> misunderstandings, conflict and disaster in the long run. >> >> Darryl >> >> >> On 1/8/2011 11:50 PM, Keith Hudson wrote: >>> Ed, >>> >>> Yes . . . well I mentioned this in my piece. Over the centuries the Chinese >>> amassed a large number of inventions here and there in a vast country which >>> then drifted into Europe in the Middle Ages. The real problem for China >>> began at the time of the Ming dynasty (early 1400s) when multi-masted ships >>> (that is, international trade) was outlawed. From then onwards they were no >>> longer receptive to catalytic ideas from the outside world. It's economy >>> was large enough (and its internal freight routes were adequate enough -- >>> principally its grand canal linking the 'export markets' of the north and >>> south) for it to remain viable, but it never made any great strides from >>> then on. Its culture and economy was largely locked and introverted. >>> >>> The original problem (that the abstract scientific ideas of the West from >>> about 1700 onwards couldn't be immediately written down in ideographic >>> Chinese) doesn't apply any longer. (Now that they've absorbed the ideas >>> they can be written down in Chinese -- albeit in railway length words!) The >>> problem today (which, as I said, the government is seriously worried about) >>> is that their children and young people are not curious or creative enough >>> -- and they (not I) put it down to the many years of intensive rote >>> learning necessary to acquire reading and writing. >>> >>> Keith >>> >>> At 12:28 08/01/2011 -0500, you wrote: >>> >>>> Interesting Keith, but despite the problem of their written language, the >>>> Chinese do seem to have been able to come up with inventions in the past. >>>> I recalled reading something about them having invented gunpowder, so I >>>> looked that up on Wikipedia and to my surprise found that they had not >>>> only invented gunpowder, but a host of other things:<?xml:namespace prefix >>>> = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> >>>> >>>> China has been the source of many significant inventions, including the >>>> Four Great Inventions of ancient China: papermaking, the compass, >>>> gunpowder, and printing (both woodblock and movable type). The list below >>>> contains these and other inventions. >>>> >>>> The Chinese invented technologies involving mechanics, hydraulics, and >>>> mathematics applied to horology,metallurgy, astronomy, agriculture, >>>> engineering, music theory, craftsmanship, nautics, and warfare. By the >>>> Warring States Period (403221 BC), they had advanced metallurgic >>>> technology, including the blast furnace and cupola furnace, while the >>>> finery forge and puddling process were known by the Han Dynasty(202 BC AD >>>> 220). A sophisticated economic system in <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = >>>> "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><?xml:namespace prefix = u1 >>>> />China gave birth to inventions such as paper money during the Song >>>> Dynasty (9601279). The invention of gunpowder by the 10th century led to >>>> an array of inventions such as the fire lance, land mine, naval mine, hand >>>> cannon, exploding cannonballs, multistage rocket, and rocket bombs with >>>> aerodynamic wings and explosive payloads. With the navigational aid of the >>>> 11th-century compass and ability to steer at high sea with the 1st-century >>>> sternpost rudder, premodern Chinese sailors sailed as far as East Africa >>>> and Egypt.[1][2][3] In water-powered clockworks, the premodern Chinese had >>>> used the escapement mechanism since the 8th century and the endless >>>> power-transmitting chain drive in the 11th century. They also made large >>>> mechanical puppet theaters driven by waterwheels and carriage wheels and >>>> wine-servingautomatons driven by paddle wheel boats. >>>> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chinese_inventions) >>>> >>>> The quote mentions agriculture, but not the intensive agriculture of the >>>> rice paddie. I recall reading somewhere that rice paddies were partly a >>>> response to the need to feed vast armies. >>>> >>>> Despite the problems raised by their written language, the Chinese must >>>> have had some way of encapsulating their inventions because they were >>>> quite widely used. And in the case of Europe, it wasn't so much language >>>> that was essential to the spread of ideas. Rather it was the invention of >>>> the printing press and the movement away from Latin to the vernacular that >>>> swept ideas across the continent. >>>> >>>> If their written language presents a problem currently, there is good >>>> reason to believe that the Chinese will have no problem in adapting. A >>>> few days ago, I saw a TV interveiw with Justin Yinfu Lin, Chief Economist >>>> of the World Bank. The interview was in English, and Yinfu Lin's >>>> responses were in English, but in an English so thick that I had a lot of >>>> trouble understanding what he was saying. However, he knew exactly what >>>> he was saying. >>>> >>>> My point is that if there is a problem, I'm sure that the Chinese will >>>> find a way around it. >>>> >>>> Ed >>>> >>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> From: Keith Hudson >>>>> To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, ,EDUCATION >>>>> Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2011 5:44 AM >>>>> Subject: [Futurework] Why China won't win in this century >>>>> >>>>> The reason why China will never win hands-down in its current economic >>>>> war with America is the same as why Japan didn't succeed in the 1980s >>>>> when all were expecting that its corporations and banks would eat America >>>>> up (Americans included). The reason is that both countries are good at >>>>> copying ideas and technologies; neither is good at inventing new ones. >>>>> >>>>> It's their written language that's the main part of their problem. It's >>>>> non-phonetic. It means that in order to acquire a basic vocabulary -- of, >>>>> say, 2,000 or 3,000 words (the content of their average newspapers) -- >>>>> children have to learn uniquely-shaped characters (whole words) which >>>>> have no, or very little, relationship with their utterance. A Chinese or >>>>> Japanese child can learn to speak his language quite as readily as >>>>> children do the world over, but learning how to read or write each >>>>> individual word takes many years. And there's only one way, unfortunately >>>>> for children, and that's by rote learning. And thousands of hours of rote >>>>> learning over many years under the strict discipline of slave-masters in >>>>> the schoolroom doesn't do anything for the creativity of young minds -- >>>>> or for older minds for that matter because the basic mental skills are >>>>> aptitudes are thoroughly laid down before puberty. >>>>> >>>>> The Chinese and Japanese governments are well aware of the damage that >>>>> rote learning is doing to them -- and say so quite frequently. Although >>>>> both countries can churn out ten of thousands of science and engineering >>>>> graduates every year, there's scarcely an independent mind among them. >>>>> Independent 'garage inventors', as we have in the West, are as rare as >>>>> hen's teeth in China and Japan. For example, Japan has been >>>>> industrialized for over a century -- only a decade or two less than other >>>>> Western countries -- yet it has only won 15 Nobel prizes in the science >>>>> subjects. Compare this figure with those of America (261), the UK (91) >>>>> and Germany (88). China has only won 10! However, this comparison is >>>>> unfair because China's have only been won since it woke up in the 1970s. >>>>> America's number also needs to be modified because about a third of its >>>>> prizes have been won by foreign-born scientists who became American >>>>> citizens after migrating there. >>>>> >>>>> It's all Emperor Qin Shi Huang's fault (yes, the same as is famed for his >>>>> terracotta army). Once Qin had conquered several countries and unified >>>>> China in 221BC, he standardized as many things as possible from weights >>>>> and measures and currency through to the written language. All the >>>>> various scholars throughout his empire, speaking scores of different >>>>> languages (some with and some without a written form) were forced -- on >>>>> pain of death -- to produce a composite, but common, written language. >>>>> And this could only be non-phonetic, of course. Even the mighty power of >>>>> Emperor Qin couldn't force millions of his subjects to learn a new common >>>>> spoken language but he could certainly force his relatively few scholars >>>>> to produce a new common written one. One popular penalty in those days >>>>> was to cut someone through his midriff, mount him on a platter of hot tar >>>>> and take him around the town, gesticulating and shouting before he >>>>> expired. >>>>> >>>>> And herein lies a paradox, because the industrial revolution in Europe >>>>> would never have happened without starting from a basic stock of scores >>>>> of innovations -- such as canal locks, differential gears, sowing grain >>>>> in rows and so forth -- that had drifted in from China along the Great >>>>> Silk Road over a period of centuries. However, this doesn't signify that >>>>> the Chinese had been more inventive than Europeans. But its common >>>>> written language had meant that when one innovation -- say a wheelbarrow >>>>> (very important indeed for both China and Europe) -- had been invented by >>>>> a genius in one tucked-away corner of China, then the local mandarin >>>>> could write and tell hundreds more all about this wonderful new device. >>>>> >>>>> But what once had been an accelerator for both Chinese and European >>>>> civilizations actually became a retardant for China when the Western >>>>> Enlightenment and scientific revolution stirred into life in the 1600s >>>>> and 1700s. The Chinese had no way of encapsulating these new ideas. A >>>>> Chinese mandarin visiting Europe in, say, the 1700s or 1800s, and >>>>> learning about the new exciting scientific ideas (if he'd learned Latin >>>>> or another European language of course) had no way of disseminating them >>>>> widely in China because there he had no method of writing them down in >>>>> Chinese words that would have been instantly recognizable by fellow >>>>> Chinese scholars or engineers. He could only convey the new ideas vaguely >>>>> by speaking of them face-to-face when he returned home. >>>>> >>>>> Thus Japan (which had inherited thousands of Chinese words) and China >>>>> were left behind by the industrial revolution in England, Germany and >>>>> America. They didn't begin to catch up in earnest until the the 1870s >>>>> (the Meiji Revolution) and the 1970s (the Deng Xiaoping Revolution) >>>>> respectively. And this is still -- largely -- where they are today. Both >>>>> the Chinese and Japanese governments are trying to phoneticize their >>>>> written languages but only very slowly, such is the cultural conservatism >>>>> of two thousands years to contend with. >>>>> >>>>> What might be significant in China (though not yet happening in Japan), >>>>> is that all their college and university entrants have to learn spoken >>>>> and written English these days. All their top government officials speak >>>>> English and most business and science faculties in their universities use >>>>> English widely in their seminars. Also, thousands of their brightest >>>>> young post-grad scientists go to America or England for research >>>>> experience and qualifications. Indeed, once they are here for a few years >>>>> they become quite as inventive as Western scientists (if not more so when >>>>> you look at the authorship of many papers in heavyweight subject, say >>>>> genetics or particle physics). Unfortunately for the Chinese and Japanese >>>>> governments many, if not most, of the most innovative scientific minds >>>>> elect to stay in their adoptive countries rather than to return. >>>>> >>>>> But the problem is even more serious for China and Japan. Almost as >>>>> important as are the original ideas of innovative individuals is the >>>>> necessity of other individuals who will give a welcome to new ideas and >>>>> help to develop them. And it's this open-minded hinterland which is still >>>>> limited because of their deep, conservative, authoritative cultures. >>>>> Goodness knows, new ideas often have a hard time being accepted in the >>>>> West. Even here, the crazy ideas of yesteryear sometimes have to wait >>>>> until its die-hard opponents are dead and buried and a brand new >>>>> generation appears. Only then are the ideas seen to be not so crazy after >>>>> all. >>>>> >>>>> There we are then. Japan came close to hollowing out America and Western >>>>> Europe 30 years ago with its superbly made (Western-invented) products. >>>>> China is threatening to do the same in the coming years. But the >>>>> innovative momentum is still with the West and this sort of cultural >>>>> momentum takes a century or two to die down -- if it ever does -- or a >>>>> century to acquire -- if it ever does in China and Japan. >>>>> >>>>> Keith >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Keith Hudson, Saltford, England http://allisstatus.wordpress.com/2011/01/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Futurework mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework >>>> >>>> Keith Hudson, Saltford, England http://allisstatus.wordpress.com/2011/01/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Futurework mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework >> _______________________________________________ >> Futurework mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > Keith Hudson, Saltford, England http://allisstatus.wordpress.com/2011/01/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
