中医最重者理法，然后才是方药。现代医学的理论无法理解中医理论的现实意 义，只看到了中医方药的有效性，所以试图用他们的理论重新解释中药治病的原理 ，但事实早已作出了回答，这条路是行不通的。就如一定要用细胞学的理论去指导 一个木匠的技能一样，是完全风马牛不相及的事。一定如此，只能最后让木匠无所 适从，连自己原先的手艺都丢掉。
说到不为大众理解，其实现代科学的复杂程度比阴阳五行的学说更不容易理解 。对大众而言，无论你怎么解释，都将是如隔山对话。大众之所以更趋向于首先相 信西医，绝非大众对西医的理论更能了解，相反，倒是因为缺乏必要的了解，才会 对西医形成盲目迷信。大众的取舍其实是一种趋炎附势行为，也即谁得势听谁的， 而不是因为哪个更容易理解。对于一个缺乏理论训练的普通人，任何医学都是难以 理解的，就像中医往往被理解成清热，西医往往被理解为消炎一样。
所以对于大众并不存在说服的问题，倒是对政策的决策者以及有关舆论的操纵 者需要做说服的工作。西医的得势，是与现代科学的影响分不开的，但这种影响并 没有为大众就医提供正确的指导，电脑或者核磁共振与治疗某种病并无直接的因果 关系，但很多人会在下意识中将两种不相干的事理作超越逻辑的对接。治病的方法 其实并不在复杂的技术之中，就像吃饭一样，人用不着将咽喉首先换成最先进的电 子产品，嘴也用不着换成橡胶合成或是金属玻璃钢制品，人类无论如何进化，有些 自然属性都是无法彻底退化掉。只要人的自然属性还在，人的生存与健康就离不开 自然的因素，如空气、水、阳光、粮食、药。中药是自然的产物，所以在原理上能 治疗作为同是自然产物的人的疾病。就像人要吃土生土长的粮食而不食用化学合成 的食物一样。
一位中医人士反思说：“阐述与解释中医，使其普及于大众，是习中医者之责 任，即使自己明白了其中意义，但不能要求所有人都用你的方法去了解它，用各种 不同方法来表达中医的精髓是必要的。”这句话实在令人费解，如果不用中医自己 的理论阐述，中医的精髓将如何表达？就像书法艺术一样，如果一定要放弃汉字书 写的基本点画，单纯以平面构成立论来解释书法美学的真谛，还会是真正意义上的 书法吗？不用其本来的方法去了解一种理论或是技术，是不是意味着在作与这种理 论或技术的自我表达毫不相干的曲解？
对于普通人，接受一件事物不一定要理解，就像电视手机计算机的基本原理一 样，使用者不一定都能够了解，但不了解并不妨碍他们运用。其实对大多数人来说 ，大多数东西都是日用不知的。难道坐飞机的人一定要对飞机发动机的原理非常了 解才能乘坐飞机吗？吃饭一定要知道食物如何分解才能动口吗？对于一个没受过教 育的人，只要能用，他们一般是不要求一定理解的，因为他们至少还了解一点自己 的知识水平与理解力，但这并不意味着他没有成为病人的资格。
所以，并非中医自身没有争取别人的理解，实际上是人们对中医缺乏理解的兴 趣与诚意，就如同我无法责怪一个外国人不用我所了解的语言说话一样，我没有理 由也没有权力一定要人家学会我的语言，想了解人家的意思，只好学习人家的语言 ，即使这种语言十分难解，也不能因此将责任推到对方的身上。何况医学的原理远 非两种语言之间的转换那么可以一一对应。对于真正想了解中医的人，汗牛充栋的 中医经论的表达其实已经是非常充分的了。
变与不变：中医在进步中倒退
一
进乎技的学问都是越下功夫水平越高，东西没有变，信任和用功的程度不同 ，能力和水平自然会有高下之别。今人对中医之信任不如古人，用功的程度也不如 古人，同时又被其他东西干扰思路，自然水平不如古人，这是很正常的事情。不能 说有了汽车飞机就什么都比古人强了，诗词无法超越唐宋，文章书法无法超越汉晋 ，事实就是如此。根本都不学了，又怎么可能超越古人呢？超越了反而成了怪事。
中医不同于其他的技艺之处在于直到今天还能应用于人，而且无论信不信， 欣赏不欣赏，只要用对了就会见效，而且效如桴鼓，这个应该是中医至今还没有灭 绝的原因。等到彻底不会应用了，连一点疗效都拿不出来的时候中医也就该彻底在 人类中灭亡了，现在从整体上来说似乎离那一天已经不遥远了。
二
如果每一个美术学院的学生都想超越达芬奇，每一个音乐学院的学生都想超 越贝多芬，虽然其志可嘉，但理想与现实之间的差距任何人都不会怀疑。不能说你 有了电子琴就超过了贝多芬，有了电脑喷绘就超过了达芬奇，技术的进步并不意味 着水平的提高，任何工具的改进都无法代替米开朗基罗和鲁班灵巧的双手。当然， 扁鹊与华佗的起死回生之术也是一样。
试问吴带当风的一笔与张僧繇的画龙点睛之笔是电脑卡通的电子喷绘所能取 代的吗？明式家具的典雅华丽是合成材料化合压缩所能比拟的吗？勾践的青铜剑锋 是现代冶炼技术与车床磨铣所能造就的吗？
一个时代有一个时代的辉煌，技术的改变从个体意义上来说并不一定代表进 步，相反倒必然意味着另一种技术已经成为绝响。
三
关键之处就在于，中医是一门不太依赖其他工具的学问，工具的进步对中医水 平的高低并无太大的影响。就像航天技术的进步并不能改进人类的排泄水平一样， 并不是坐上飞机了便秘就好了，痔疮也不犯了。后一句话的意思是说，疾病也是不 太受技术进步的影响。所以，从同等意义上来看，反而是中医对疾病比较有办法， 而不是技术。技术只能把腿截掉，而不能让病腿恢复正常，内脏也是一样。
其实说得更本质一些就是，虽然技术能改变一些人的生存状况，但其实技术 与人自身的关系并不是太大，比如吃饭，比如拉屎，比如睡觉，人都不太受技术的 影响。倒是有些时候负面影响更为显著，比如用化肥催生的食品味道较差，睡席梦 思并不比硬板床和火炕更舒服。反而是风寒暑湿之类随时会影响人类的健康，有些 东西更是永远也不会改变，比如水火。当然，大家都知道现在水不如以前洁净了， 这自然又是技术进步的结果，但除掉污染，水还是水。
四
现代的病种类越来越多了，自然和技术进步有关，可是治疗的方法虽然花样不 断翻新却似乎并没有什么本质的进步，绝症依然是绝症，而且绝症越来越多。当然 ，中医不这么看，在中医看来无非还是六气偏胜而已，所以治疗还是不外乎六经辨 证。很多东西在变，但更多的东西没变，而且永远也不会变。比如人类的服装不断 在变，但人还是在用脚走路，还是用嘴吃饭，吃喝拉撒睡除去身体之外的背景，与 古人并没有两样。
还有，病实际上也没变，从本质上看仍然不过是六气的偏胜，就像人的吃喝拉撒睡 一样。所以，中医的治疗方法也不用变，随机应变的只是辨证的思路而已。
理论的霸权主义与中西医争论的焦点
任何学科的理论都有自己的观察角度和阐述方法，只有通过实践才能检验其理 论是否正确。如果有人依靠自身的某种权威一定要求物理学放弃自身原有的基本概 念，改用阴阳五行学说重新阐释自己的理论，一定会遭到所有明智者的反对，除了 那些趋炎附势者。很显然，强迫别人一定遵循自己的观察角度与阐述方法来解释别 人的理论，是一种理论的霸权主义。
其实道理非常简单，就像说话，你如果想了解人家说的是什么，你只有学会人 家的语言，而不能怪别人不会用你的语言说话。就像过去中国人通常把外国话叫鸟 语一样，其实人家说的也是人话，只不过你听不懂而已，人家的语言同样可以表达 交流，你不能因为自己听不懂就责怪人家不用你的语言说话。这种歧视异己的行为 是很荒谬的，也是很狭隘愚蠢的。如果你真的想听明白人家说的是什么，你只有谦 卑地学会人家的语言，而不能强迫人家一定要学会你的语言，或者按照你能理解的 方式改造自己的语言。当然，也没有人强迫你一定学会别人的语言，想不想学是你 自己的事，这是你的自由。只要能够应用于表达交流，语言的作用已经达到了，如 果一种语言能用简单的内容传达更多更准确的信息，那么这种语言一定是更有效率 的。这种实用性应该是区别语言好坏的标准，而不能仅以使用者的多少作为判断的 依据。
强迫中医一定要用现代科学的语言阐述自己的理论，这种态度本身就是不科学 的，因为中医观察现象的角度及思维方式与西方现代科学是完全不同的。但中医同 样能够用事实的疗效来验证自己理论的正确。西医不肯下问于中医是他的自由，但 他也同样没有权力要求中医一定用西医的理论阐述治病的原理。试想，如果是中医 一定要求西医用阴阳五行的理论解释西医的治病原理，西医能接受吗？那么，为什 么西医就有特权来这样要求中医呢？
这是一个治学态度的问题，僵化地执着于一种理论，不顾事实真相，顽固地树 立自己的权威，执迷不悟，故步自封，本着这种态度无论从事什么样的研究都是要 走入死胡同的，治不好病也就不足为奇了。
其实阴阳五行学说并不比那些肉眼看不到的分子原子距离普通人更遥远。只不 过近百年来，现代科学借助一种外在的推广力量建立了自己特殊的权威而已，人们 对那种同样看不见摸不着的科学理论的崇拜其实是一种不自觉的趋炎附势行为，这 是普通人对客观真理缺乏独立思考的自觉性造成的。用康德的话说，是一种不经过 他人引导，就对运用自己的理智无能为力的蒙昧状态。
这个时候就更需要一切有识之士联合起来，廓清这种蒙昧的混沌状态，以客观事实 为依据，以事实疗效来阐述中医治病的原理，以实际应用来推广中华传统文化。
自然与科学，中西医碰撞的焦点
中医最重视的是“理”与“法”，其次才是“方”与“药”。现代医学的理论无法理解中医理论的现实意义，只看到了中医方药的有效性，所以试图用他们的理论重新解释中药治病的原理，但事实早已作出了回答，这条路是行不通的。这就好比一定要用细胞学的理论去指导一个木匠的技能一样，是完全风马牛不相及的事。如果一定这样做，只能最后让木匠无所适从，连自己原先的手艺都丢掉。
说到不为大众理解，其实现代科学的复杂程度比阴阳五行的学说更不容易理解。对大众而言，无论你怎么解释，都将是如隔山对话。大众之所以更趋向于首先相信西医，绝非大众对西医的理论更能了解，相反，倒是因为缺乏必要的了解，才会对西医形成盲目迷信。大众的取舍其实是一种趋炎附势行为，也即谁得势听谁的，而不是因为哪个更容易理解。对于一个缺乏理论训练的普通人，任何医学都是难以理解的，就像中医往往被理解成清热（清除热邪），西医往往被理解为消炎（消除炎症）一样。
所以对于大众并不存在说服的问题，倒是对政策的决策者以及有关舆论的操纵者需要做说服的工作。西医的得势，是与现代科学的影响分不开的，但这种影响并没有为大众就医提供正确的指导，电脑或者核磁共振与治疗某种病并无直接的因果关系，但很多人会在下意识中将两种不相干的事理作超越逻辑的对接。治病的方法其实并不在复杂的技术之中，就像吃饭一样，人用不着将咽喉首先换成最先进的电子产品，嘴也用不着换成橡胶合成或是金属玻璃钢制品，人类无论如何进化，有些自然属性都是无法彻底退化掉。只要人的自然属性还在，人的生存与健康就离不开自然的因素，如空气、水、阳光、粮食、药。中药是自然的产物，所以在原理上能治疗作为同是自然产物的人的疾病。就像人要吃土生土长的粮食而不食用化学合成的食物一样。
一位中医人士反思说：“阐述与解释中医，使其普及于大众，是习中医者之责任，即使自己明白了其中意义，但不能要求所有人都用你的方法去了解它，用各种不同方法来表达中医的精髓是必要的。”这句话实在令人费解，如果不用中医自己的理论阐述，中医的精髓将如何表达？就像书法艺术一样，如果一定要放弃汉字书写的基本点画，单纯以平面构成立论来解释书法美学的真谛，还会是真正意义上的书法吗？不用其本来的方法去了解一种理论或是技术，是不是意味着在作与这种理论或技术的自我表达毫不相干的曲解？
对于普通人，接受一件事物不一定要理解，就像电视手机计算机的基本原理一样，使用者不一定都能够了解，但不了解并不妨碍他们运用。其实对大多数人来说，大多数东西都是日用不知的。难道坐飞机的人一定要对飞机发动机的原理非常了解才能乘坐飞机吗？吃饭一定要知道食物如何分解才能动口吗？对于一个没受过教育的人，只要能用，他们一般是不要求一定理解的，因为他们至少还了解一点自己的知识水平与理解力，但这并不意味着他没有成为病人的资格。
所以，并非中医自身没有争取别人的理解，实际上是人们对中医缺乏理解的兴趣与诚意，就如同我无法责怪一个外国人不用我所了解的语言说话一样，我没有理由也没有权力一定要人家学会我的语言，想了解人家的意思，只好学习人家的语言，即使这种语言十分难解，也不能因此将责任推到对方的身上。何况医学的原理远非两种语言之间的转换那么可以一一对应。对于真正想了解中医的人，汗牛充栋的中医经论的表达其实已经是非常充分的了。
变与不变：中医在进步中倒退
一
进乎技的学问都是越下功夫水平越高，东西没有变，信任和用功的程度不同，能力和水平自然会有高下之别。今人对中医之信任不如古人，用功的程度也不如古人，同时又被其他东西干扰思路，自然水平不如古人，这是很正常的事情。不能说有了汽车飞机就什么都比古人强了，诗词无法超越唐宋，文章书法无法超越汉晋，事实就是如此。根本都不学了，又怎么可能超越古人呢？超越了反而成了怪事。
中医不同于其他的技艺之处在于直到今天还能应用于人，而且无论信不信，欣赏不欣赏，只要用对了就会见效，而且效如桴鼓（像鼓槌敲鼓那样迅速有效），这个应该是中医至今还没有灭绝的原因。等到彻底不会应用了，连一点疗效都拿不出来的时候中医也就该彻底在人类中灭亡了，现在从整体上来说似乎离那一天已经不遥远了。
二
如果每一个美术学院的学生都想超越达芬奇，每一个音乐学院的学生都想超越贝多芬，虽然其志可嘉，但理想与现实之间的差距任何人都不会怀疑。不能说你有了电子琴就超过了贝多芬，有了电脑喷绘就超过了达芬奇，技术的进步并不意味着水平的提高，任何工具的改进都无法代替米开朗基罗和鲁班灵巧的双手。当然，扁鹊与华佗的起死回生之术也是一样。
试问吴带当风的一笔与张僧繇的画龙点睛之笔是电脑卡通的电子喷绘所能取代的吗？明式家具的典雅华丽是合成材料化合压缩所能比拟的吗？勾践的青铜剑锋是现代冶炼技术与车床磨铣所能造就的吗？
一个时代有一个时代的辉煌，技术的改变从个体意义上来说并不一定代表进步，相反倒必然意味着另一种技术已经成为绝响。
三
关键之处就在于，中医是一门不太依赖其他工具的学问，工具的进步对中医水平的高低并无太大的影响。就像航天技术的进步并不能改进人类的排泄水平一样，并不是坐上飞机了便秘就好了，痔疮也不犯了。后一句话的意思是说，疾病也是不太受技术进步的影响。所以，从同等意义上来看，反而是中医对疾病比较有办法，而不是技术。技术只能把腿截掉，而不能让病腿恢复正常，内脏也是一样。
其实说得更本质一些就是，虽然技术能改变一些人的生存状况，但其实技术与人自身的关系并不是太大，比如吃饭，比如拉屎，比如睡觉，人都不太受技术的影响。倒是有些时候负面影响更为显著，比如用化肥催生的食品味道较差，睡席梦思并不比硬板床和火炕更舒服。反而是风寒暑湿之类随时会影响人类的健康，有些东西更是永远也不会改变，比如水火。当然，大家都知道现在水不如以前洁净了，这自然又是技术进步的结果，但除掉污染，水还是水。
四
现代的病种类越来越多了，自然和技术进步有关，可是治疗的方法虽然花样不断翻新却似乎并没有什么本质的进步，绝症依然是绝症，而且绝症越来越多。当然，中医不这么看，在中医看来无非还是六气偏胜而已，所以治疗还是不外乎六经辨证（根据六经传变规律进行辨证）。很多东西在变，但更多的东西没变，而且永远也不会变。比如人类的服装不断在变，但人还是在用脚走路，还是用嘴吃饭，吃喝拉撒睡除去身体之外的背景，与古人并没有两样。
还有，病实际上也没变，从本质上看仍然不过是六气的偏胜，就像人的吃喝拉撒睡一样。所以，中医的治疗方法也不用变，随机应变的只是辨证的思路而已。
理论的霸权主义与中西医争论的焦点
任何学科的理论都有自己的观察角度和阐述方法，只有通过实践才能检验其理论是否正确。如果有人依靠自身的某种权威一定要求物理学放弃自身原有的基本概念，改用阴阳五行学说重新阐释自己的理论，一定会遭到所有明智者的反对，除了那些趋炎附势者。很显然，强迫别人一定遵循自己的观察角度与阐述方法来解释别人的理论，是一种理论的霸权主义。
其实道理非常简单，就像说话，你如果想了解人家说的是什么，你只有学会人家的语言，而不能怪别人不会用你的语言说话。就像过去中国人通常把外国话叫鸟语一样，其实人家说的也是人话，只不过你听不懂而已，人家的语言同样可以表达交流，你不能因为自己听不懂就责怪人家不用你的语言说话。这种歧视异己的行为是很荒谬的，也是很狭隘愚蠢的。如果你真的想听明白人家说的是什么，你只有谦卑地学会人家的语言，而不能强迫人家一定要学会你的语言，或者按照你能理解的方式改造自己的语言。当然，也没有人强迫你一定学会别人的语言，想不想学是你自己的事，这是你的自由。只要能够应用于表达交流，语言的作用已经达到了，如果一种语言能用简单的内容传达更多更准确的信息，那么这种语言一定是更有效率的。这种实用性应该是区别语言好坏的标准，而不能仅以使用者的多少作为判断的依据。
强迫中医一定要用现代科学的语言阐述自己的理论，这种态度本身就是不科学的，因为中医观察现象的角度及思维方式与西方现代科学是完全不同的。但中医同样能够用事实的疗效来验证自己理论的正确。西医不肯下问于中医是他的自由，但他也同样没有权力要求中医一定用西医的理论阐述治病的原理。试想，如果是中医一定要求西医用阴阳五行的理论解释西医的治病原理，西医能接受吗？那么，为什么西医就有特权来这样要求中医呢？
这是一个治学态度的问题，僵化地执着于一种理论，不顾事实真相，顽固地树立自己的权威，执迷不悟，故步自封，本着这种态度无论从事什么样的研究都是要走入死胡同的，治不好病也就不足为奇了。
其实阴阳五行学说并不比那些肉眼看不到的分子原子距离普通人更遥远。只不过近百年来，现代科学借助一种外在的推广力量建立了自己特殊的权威而已，人们对那种同样看不见摸不着的科学理论的崇拜其实是一种不自觉的趋炎附势行为，这是普通人对客观真理缺乏独立思考的自觉性造成的。用康德的话说，是一种不经过他人引导，就对运用自己的理智无能为力的蒙昧状态。
这个时候就更需要一切有识之士联合起来，廓清这种蒙昧的混沌状态，以客观事实为依据，以事实疗效来阐述中医治病的原理，以实际应用来推广中华传统文化。
自然与科学，中西医碰撞的焦点
The most important aspects of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) are its principles (Li, 理) and methods (Fa, 法), followed by prescriptions (Fang, 方) and herbs (Yao, 药). The theories of modern medicine cannot comprehend the practical significance of TCM theories; they only observe the efficacy of TCM prescriptions and thus attempt to reinterpret the principles of herbal treatment using their own theoretical frameworks. However, reality has already provided an answer: this approach is unworkable. It is akin to insisting on using cell theory to guide a carpenter's skills—a complete mismatch. If one insists on doing so, the carpenter will eventually become confused and lose even their original craftsmanship.
Regarding the lack of public understanding, the complexity of modern science is actually harder for the general public to grasp than the theories of Yin-Yang and Five Elements (Yin-Yang Wu-Xing, 阴阳五行). For the masses, no matter how one explains it, communication remains like talking across a mountain. The public's tendency to initially trust Western medicine does not stem from a better understanding of its theories; rather, it is precisely due to a lack of necessary understanding that blind superstition towards Western medicine arises. The public's preference is essentially a behavior of following power trends—listening to whoever holds power—rather than choosing what is easier to understand. For an ordinary person lacking theoretical training, any medical system is difficult to comprehend, just as TCM is often simplistically understood as "clearing heat" (Qing-Re, 清热) and Western medicine as "anti-inflammation" (Xiao-Yan, 消炎).
Therefore, there is no need to persuade the general public; instead, persuasion efforts should be directed at policy decision-makers and those who manipulate public opinion. The dominance of Western medicine is inseparable from the influence of modern science, but this influence has not provided correct guidance for public healthcare. Computers or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) have no direct causal relationship with curing specific diseases, yet many people subconsciously make illogical connections between these unrelated matters. The methods of treating illness do not lie in complex technologies. Just as eating does not require replacing the throat with the most advanced electronic devices or the mouth with rubber or metal composites, certain natural attributes of humans cannot be completely eliminated through evolution. As long as human natural attributes remain, survival and health depend on natural factors such as air, water, sunlight, food, and medicine. Since Chinese herbal medicines are products of nature, they can theoretically treat diseases in humans, who are also natural products. This is similar to how humans eat naturally grown grains rather than chemically synthesized foods.
A TCM practitioner reflected: "It is the responsibility of those who study TCM to expound and explain it to popularize it among the public. Even if one understands its meaning, one cannot demand that everyone understand it using one's own method. It is necessary to use various different methods to express the essence of TCM." This statement is truly puzzling. If one does not use TCM's own theoretical framework to expound upon it, how can the essence of TCM be expressed? Just as in calligraphy art, if one were to abandon the basic strokes of Chinese characters and solely rely on two-dimensional composition to explain the true meaning of calligraphic aesthetics, would it still be genuine calligraphy? Does not using the original methods to understand a theory or technique imply making distortions irrelevant to the self-expression of that theory or technique?
For ordinary people, accepting something does not necessarily require understanding it. Just as users of televisions, mobile phones, and computers may not fully understand their basic principles, lack of understanding does not hinder their use. In fact, for most people, most things are used daily without being understood. Must someone who takes a flight deeply understand the principle of jet engines to board it? Must one know how food decomposes before eating? For an uneducated person, as long as something works, they generally do not demand full comprehension, as they possess at least some awareness of their own knowledge level and cognitive capacity. However, this does not mean they lack the qualification to become patients.
Thus, it is not that TCM itself fails to strive for others' understanding; rather, it is that people lack the interest and sincerity to understand TCM. It is like my inability to blame a foreigner for not speaking the language I know. I have no reason or right to force them to learn my language. To understand their meaning, I must learn their language, even if it is extremely difficult. One cannot shift the blame onto the other party because of this. Moreover, the principles of medicine are far more complex than a one-to-one correspondence between two languages. For those who truly wish to understand TCM, the vast amount of existing TCM classics and treatises provides sufficiently comprehensive expression.
Change and Unchange: TCM Regressing Amidst Progress
I
Scholarships that advance through skill improve with greater effort. The subject matter remains unchanged; differences in trust and diligence naturally lead to variations in ability and proficiency. Today's practitioners trust TCM less than ancients did and exert less effort, while their thinking is distracted by other influences. Consequently, their proficiency is inferior to that of the ancients, which is a normal phenomenon. One cannot claim that having cars and airplanes makes everything superior to ancient times. Poetry cannot surpass the Tang and Song dynasties, and prose/calligraphy cannot surpass the Han and Jin periods. Facts are as they are. If one does not learn at all, how can one surpass the ancients? Surpassing them would indeed be anomalous.
What distinguishes TCM from other crafts is that it remains applicable to humans today. Regardless of belief or appreciation, if applied correctly, it yields results swiftly, like a drumstick striking a drum (Xiao Ru Fu Gu, 效如桴鼓). This efficacy is likely the reason TCM has not yet perished. When application becomes impossible and no efficacy can be demonstrated, TCM will finally vanish from humanity. From a holistic perspective, that day seems not far off.
II
If every art academy student wishes to surpass Da Vinci, and every music student wishes to surpass Beethoven, although their aspirations are commendable, no one doubts the gap between ideal and reality. Possessing an electronic keyboard does not make one superior to Beethoven, nor does computer printing surpass Da Vinci. Technological progress does not equate to improved skill; no tool improvement can replace the dexterous hands of Michelangelo or Lu Ban. Similarly, the miraculous resuscitation techniques of Bian Que and Hua Tuo are unique.
Can the dynamic brushstroke of Wu Daozi ("Wu Dai Dang Feng", 吴带当风) or Zhang Sengyao's "painting the dragon and dotting the eyes" (Hua Long Dian Jing, 画龙点睛) be replaced by computer cartoon digital printing? Can the elegance of Ming-style furniture be compared to synthetic compressed materials? Can the blade of King Goujian's bronze sword be replicated by modern smelting and lathe milling?
Each era has its brilliance. Technological change does not necessarily represent progress from an individual perspective; conversely, it inevitably signifies that another technology has become a lost art.
III
The key point is that TCM is a discipline that relies little on external tools. Technological progress has little impact on the level of TCM practice. Just as advancements in aerospace technology do not improve human excretion levels—flying on a plane does not cure constipation or hemorrhoids—the implication is that diseases are also largely unaffected by technological progress. Therefore, comparatively, TCM offers more solutions for diseases than technology does. Technology can only amputate a leg but cannot restore a diseased leg to normal function, nor can it heal internal organs.
More fundamentally, while technology can alter living conditions, its relationship with human physiology is limited. Activities like eating, defecating, and sleeping are not significantly influenced by technology. Sometimes, the negative impacts are more pronounced, such as poor-tasting food produced via chemical fertilizers or the discomfort of Simmons mattresses compared to hard boards or kang beds. Conversely, environmental factors like wind, cold, summer heat, and dampness constantly affect human health. Some elements, like fire and water, never change. Although water is less pure now due to technological progress, apart from pollution, water remains water.
IV
Modern disease varieties are increasing, linked to nature and technological progress. However, despite constant innovations in treatment methods, there seems to be no essential progress; terminal illnesses remain terminal and are becoming more numerous. TCM views this differently. In TCM, these are merely imbalances of the Six Qi (Liu Qi, 六气). Thus, treatment still revolves around Six Meridian Syndrome Differentiation (Liu Jing Bian Zheng, 六经辨证). Many things change, but much remains unchanged and will forever remain so. Human clothing changes, but people still walk with feet and eat with mouths. Excluding external backgrounds, the acts of eating, drinking, excreting, and sleeping are no different from those of the ancients.
Furthermore, diseases themselves have not changed本质上. Essentially, they are still imbalances of the Six Qi, similar to basic bodily functions. Therefore, TCM treatment methods do not need to change; only the diagnostic reasoning needs to adapt flexibly.
Theoretical Hegemonism and the Focus of TCM-Western Medicine Debates
Every discipline's theory has its own observational perspective and exposition methods. Only through practice can the correctness of a theory be verified. If someone relied on authority to demand that physics abandon its basic concepts and re-explain its theories using Yin-Yang and Five Elements, all sensible people would oppose it, except for those who follow power trends. Clearly, forcing others to adhere to one's own observational perspective and exposition methods to interpret another's theory constitutes theoretical hegemonism.
The logic is simple. Like language, if you want to understand what someone says, you must learn their language; you cannot blame them for not speaking yours. Historically, Chinese people referred to foreign languages as "bird songs." In reality, they speak human language; you simply do not understand. Their language facilitates communication equally well. You cannot blame them for not using your language just because you don't understand it. Such discriminatory behavior is absurd and narrow-minded. If you truly wish to understand, you must humbly learn their language. You cannot force them to learn yours or modify their language to fit your understanding. No one forces you to learn another's language; learning is your choice and freedom. As long as a language serves communication, its purpose is fulfilled. If a language conveys more accurate information with simpler content, it is more efficient. Practicality should be the standard for judging language quality, not the number of speakers.
Forcing TCM to expound its theories using modern scientific language is itself unscientific, as TCM's observational angles and思维方式 (ways of thinking) differ completely from Western modern science. However, TCM can verify its theoretical correctness through factual clinical efficacy. It is Western medicine's freedom not to consult TCM, but they have no right to demand that TCM explain treatment principles using Western theories. Imagine if TCM demanded that Western medicine explain its treatment principles using Yin-Yang and Five Elements; would Western medicine accept it? Why then does Western medicine have the privilege to demand this of TCM?
This is a matter of academic attitude. Rigidly adhering to one theory, ignoring facts, stubbornly establishing authority, and remaining closed-minded leads research into dead ends. Failure to cure diseases under such attitudes is unsurprising.
In fact, the theories of Yin-Yang and Five Elements are no more distant from ordinary people than invisible molecules and atoms. Over the past century, modern science has established special authority through external promotional forces. People's worship of these unseen scientific theories is an unconscious act of following power trends, resulting from a lack of independent critical thinking regarding objective truth. As Kant described, it is a state of immaturity where one lacks the courage to use one's own understanding without guidance from another.
At this time, all enlightened individuals must unite to clarify this ignorant chaos. Using objective facts as the basis and clinical efficacy to expound the principles of TCM treatment, and promoting traditional Chinese culture through practical application, is essential.
Nature and Science: The Focal Point of the Collision Between TCM and Western Medicine