Lawry,
I wasn't complaining about your retrieval of an old posting. There's
no reason why anybody should go back as far as they want in order to
make a point. You added an interesting observation.
Keith
At 13:23 10/02/2012, you wrote:
Greetings, everyone,
I'm not sure if I should apologize for responding to an email thread
to this group from some time ago. I had resorted my inbox to look
for an old email, my eye was caught by the old thread, noticed a
posting (I guess it was Keith'Darryl's) that I had not read, popped
it open -- you guys are always interesting -- and replied not
realizing how old it was. Didn't mean to open up an old argument.
If I can grab a few minutes later today, I'd like to pick up on this
notion of "vibrations."
This is a good opportunity to say how much I enjoy the discussions
here. It always feels like a bunch of (unseen) friends have dropped
by for a cup of tea and good discussion.
Cheers,
Lawry
On Feb 10, 2012, at 2:14 AM, D & N wrote:
It was a statement based upon the history of religious oppression
and educational indoctrination of a western system that appears to
glorify the separation of body and energy (if you prefer) and thus
treat the effect rather than the cause of illness.
Whereas the drugless approach of re-aligning the energies to allow
the body to heal itself and, if needed, the use of correct foods or
medicinal herbs to rid the body of parasites (here I include
bacteria and viruses) and we have, aside from the Ayurvedic, one of
the oldest forms of medicine in the world today. Just because
western medicine appeared to give quick results in some measure
does not necessarily place it at the top of the ladder. Considering
all the ways western civilization is making not just mankind less
healthy but the total environment less healthy, I can only see the
blindness of arrogance of a western 'civilized' education in
throwing away something that has lasted for thousands of years to
accept as gospel something that is, by comparison, an infant. Let
us hope the infant has enough of a sponge-brain left to absorb
something new that is old. For humanity to be here, now, our
forebears had to be intelligent - for the most part.
I'm unsure why you took it personally.
D.
On 09/02/2012 10:59 PM, Keith Hudson wrote:
Darryl,
There's no need for gratuitous insults. Having been put by you
into the category of those of "limited spiritual intelligence" by
you, I guess I'm in the good company of the majority of Futurework
listers who may have visited conventional doctors many times but
never once to an acupuncturist.
Lawry's comment to my original posting of a year ago was fair
comment. Your last sentence wasn't and should have been scrubbed.
Keith
At 04:37 10/02/2012, you wrote:
Yes, Lawry,
I have read that acupuncture is over 5,000 years old as a medical
treatment. And at an early time in China's history laws were
passed wherein if a 'doctor' lost a patient to death and did not
hang a red lantern outside his door and a surviving relative
noted same to the local authority, said doctor was publicly beheaded.
However, that medical practice has had a hard sell in Britain.
Perhaps because it treats that which cannot be understood by most
'western' thought processes. The treatment of energies
(vibrations if you will) appears too difficult a concept for the
limited spiritual intelligence of most of the brainwashed western hemisphere.
D.
On 09/02/2012 5:41 PM, de Bivort Lawrence wrote:
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" />
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China>China has been the
source of many significant
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invention>inventions,
including the
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Great_Inventions_of_ancient_China>Four
Great Inventions of ancient China:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papermaking>papermaking, the
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compass>compass,
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunpowder>gunpowder, and
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_typography_in_East_Asia>printing
(both
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodblock_printing>woodblock
and <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movable_type>movable
type). The list below contains these and other inventions.
The <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_people>Chinese
invented
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science_and_technology_in_China>technologies
involving <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanics>mechanics,
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulics>hydraulics, and
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematics>mathematics
applied to <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horology>horology
,<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallurgy>metallurgy,
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomy>astronomy,
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture>agriculture,
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engineering>engineering,
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_theory>music theory,
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craftsmanship>craftsmanship,
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maritime_history>nautics, and
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warfare>warfare. By the
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warring_States_Period>Warring
States Period (403221 BC), they had advanced metallurgic
technology, including the
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blast_furnace>blast furnace
and <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cupola_furnace>cupola
furnace, while the
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finery_forge>finery forge and
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puddling_%28metallurgy%29>puddl
ing process were known by the
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Han_Dynasty>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
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banknote>paper money during
the <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Song_Dynasty>Song Dynasty
(9601279). The invention of gunpowder by the 10th century
led to an array of inventions such as the
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_lance>fire lance, land
mine, <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_mine>naval mine,
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_cannon>hand cannon,
exploding cannonballs, multistage
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket>rocket, and
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huolongjing#Fire_arrows_and_rockets>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
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudder>rudder, premodern
Chinese sailors sailed as far as
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Africa>East Africa and
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egypt>Egypt
.<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chinese_inventions#cite_note-0>[1]
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chinese_inventions#cite_note-1>[2]
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chinese_inventions#cite_note-2>[3]
In water-powered clockworks, the premodern Chinese had used
the <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escapement>escapement
mechanism since the 8th century and the endless
power-transmitting
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chain_drive>chain drive in the
11th century. They also made large mechanical puppet
theaters driven by
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterwheel>waterwheels and
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoke>carriage wheels and
wine-serving<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automaton>
automatons driven by
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paddle_steamer>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: <mailto:[email protected]>Keith Hudson
To: <mailto:[email protected]>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
<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
Keith Hudson, Saltford, England
http://allisstatus.wordpress.com/2011/01/
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
<mailto:[email protected]>
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
Keith Hudson, Saltford, England http://allisstatus.wordpress.com/2011/01/
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
<mailto:[email protected]>
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
Keith Hudson, Saltford, England http://allisstatus.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
<mailto:[email protected]>[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
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
