fish

[Guest guest]

Excellent points, , especially the fish and many thanks for

all your valuable input to the list. This discussion has so far

helped to render some things clearer and I guess I'm not the only

one who is grateful for suggested reading.

You are, of course, right to infer that it's possible to confuse a

workman if you give him the wrong tools, but in those areas where

two [or more] cultures intersect or interact, some useful insight

into each is visible. [in our house, it's OK to eat with chopsticks,

fingers or knife and fork.] With my thin grasp of TCM, I don't

intend to do any missionary work, but see no harm in seeking help

where it may be found. The simplicity of a system which makes sense

within its own context is attractive after a fragmented and

incomplete education. It could be as much a mistake to discard a

workable concept as to cling slavishly to a monopolistic other. The

workman will tell us that although a specific tool is perfect for a

specific job, if he doesn't have one handy, it's OK to use

whatever's in the box, if it's useful.

I agree that for each hypothesis generated there is another, just as

lovable to some, that falls, falsified and cringing, by the wayside.

I feel that when science and philosophy conflict, then one or

t'other will be found to be faulty under closer examination. A dose

of scepticism is usually necessary to digest philosophies that

profess to point the way to enlightenment or even `explanatory

satisfaction'. Perhaps it's a question of interpretation, but most

ways of looking at the world are imperfect at best, and childish or

dogmatic at worst. As I think you suggest, it's possible to live

without philosophical certainties, as I do, whilst accepting larger

over-arching principles.

BTW, where I live, it's impossible to find the books you mention so

I look forward to reading them on your site.

Love and best wishes to all,

Geoff