Hi TaiChiBob,
Thank you for your comment. I do not intend to imply that you are cutting and dividing. Of course I have no way to know whether you are or not. I must say from my experiences interacting with you I would be inclined to believe you do not do so. When I speak a caution about a topic you have introduced, that caution should be taken in general terms to a general audience and not as an assumption on my part that it is information that would specifically benefit you in particular. In fact, I have developed an interest in the topic myself simply based upon my respect for your enthusiastic opinion.
Hi cjurakpt,
Back to the topic:
First, let me be clear, I am speaking in gross generalization here. Clearly there are those in the history of Western culture that have experienced life holistically and Eastern culture has been rife with their own versions of the analytical parsing of phenomena. So please be aware I am not speaking in absolutes here. In fact we could simply break this down into two ways of interpreting phenomena and not necessarily connect these to the cultures where they appear to predominate.
So, linear analytical thinking places greater importance upon the measurement and control of phenomena. Once a phenomenon is measured and controlled to an appropriate level it is used for what is hoped to be an over all benefit. I call this the “Outside In” method of gaining knowledge. Eastern methodology, I refer to as, the “Inside Out” method.
Eastern methodology emphasizes direct knowledge. It is counter to the analytical method because the information gained CANNOT be communicated or acquired in a linear fashion. “Inside Out” information is felt, intuited, directly experienced, it is not intellectually apprehended first and then applied second! The Eastern method is to apply first and understand latter! It begins as a seed that is planted and cultivated by the teacher and the student. The result grows “of itself” in its own time, from the inside out. This makes the information of less value and quality to the Western methodology. Because direct knowledge is grown from the inside out, to parse it, is to kill.
What cannot be parsed cannot be communicated in a linear or analytically fashion. What cannot be parsed cannot be measured, what cannot be measured cannot be controlled, what cannot be controlled is to be feared. Western methodology seeks to control phenomena and therefore fears what it cannot control. One coping mechanisms used to deal with a fear is to devalue its importance. Hence the Western tendency to devalue and belittle what it CANNOT understand and it cannot understand what it cannot parse.
Direct knowledge must be validated independently by each individual through their own experience. Since the information gained from the Eastern method can only be verified by experience it cannot be communicated in a meaningful linear fashion. For example: a man who has been blind since birth has no knowledge of the quality of color. How can the quality of color be communicated in a meaningful way to someone who has no concept of what it means? We can try to explain it to him, but the linear description does him no good because he has no context of direct experience. Color has no meaning to a blind man. Without meaning it has no value. Just because the blind man has no experience of color and just because it cannot be measured by him does not mean color does not exist, neither does it destroy color’s inherent value and quality, but color MUST be directly experienced in order to provide quality and value to an individual.
Amongst many Eastern marital arts the traditional method of teaching has been by the “Inside Out, method. The teacher models the actions and the student copies. Insight into proper execution is partly gained through comments from the teacher, but primarily the insight comes from within the student. The modeled movement is a seed planted into the students mind; the teacher applies periodic watering and nutrients by giving measured supporting information and periodically demonstrating the correct form. The form or technique may be applied to the student in order to provide further insights. But it is through continued practice and application that the student gains insight into the proper function and execution of technique. The student figures it out for himself through constant repetition. Over time, the correct form and application GROWS out of the student “of itself”! The optimal performance of the form is realized by FEEL, not by the technical parsing of the movements! This FEEL for the form provides insight and information of a different quality than from a form learned according to a linear method. The linear method may provide technical expertise, but the spirit of the person is not infused into the form through this manner of learning. This not only reduces the form’s quality, it impedes the development of the student’s inner quality as well.
Form need not be parsed and explained in a linear fashion in order to learn it efficiently and effectively. If the linear fashion of learning were necessary then it would have been utilized, and it was, even in the east. The linear fashion allows for quicker learning of proper actions, this is beneficial when time is a factor, but there is an indefinable quality missing when the action is performed. This missing quality can be discerned by an experienced eye, but may not even be noticed by an inexperienced person. This indefinable quality is a condition of spirit that becomes manifested through the movements and attitude of the practitioner! This “Spirit”, that radiates from the practitioner, delineates a Master from a mere expert!
Amongst many in the medical field and amongst many New Agers the deeper qualities of Eastern philosophical thought are just not understood. One cannot just pick up a book or attend a seminar and think they will understand the eastern method of apprehending knowledge. This is why many of these individuals appear to be quacks. Many in the western culture who seek to apply eastern methods do not understand them in depth because they bring to the subject their western linear analytical mindset. This is not entirely their fault. We are conditioned by birth according to our culture and it takes much time and effort to re-condition our method of thinking. So when westerners attempt to integrate eastern concepts into their methodologies they do not realize they only have a cursory understanding. They think that because linear analytical thinking works when acquiring and implementing western knowledge and methodologies it works the same way with eastern knowledge and methodologies. Because of this they only obtain a superficial understanding of the concepts which provides for inadequate results and many times makes them look foolish.
I hope that is enough to give something to think about and comment on! I am off to bed again!
) about out theories etc.; as to the nature of the dialogue, it is indeed refreshing to have so productive an exchange on an on-going basis - at least on this part of the forum there are no daily transcontinental challenges/retractions going on (have you been over to the general forum lately? it’s a real scene over there!)
