CHAPTER 12
FACING COMPLEX SYSTEMS: THE END OF REDUCTIONISM
In modern physics, one has now divided the world not into different groups of objects but into different groups of connections. . . . What can be distinguished is the kind of connection which is primarily important in a certain phenomenon. . . . The world thus appears as a complicated tissue of events, in which connections of different kinds alternate or overlap or combine and thereby determine the texture of the whole. —WERNER HEISENBERG
The End of Reductionism
Biology, which forms the basis of Western medicine, has been undeniably successful and has made great contributions to the treatment of illness. At the heart of modern biology lies reductionism, a philosophical process that involves dividing the whole into progressively smaller parts in order to reduce the factors being considered. This very clever and successful approach to scientific research in physics, chemistry, biology, and medicine has been the doctrine of modern science since its inception. Its dominance has seen it established as a standardized way of thinking in scientific training, and it is the standard of the modern system of formal education.
The development of Western medicine naturally followed, and continues to follow, the path of reductionism. Thus anatomy leads to histology, histology to cytology, and cytology to molecular biology. Molecular biology, lying at the end of the reductionist pathway, is considered the highest level of biology. Many scientists, particularly biologists, believe that the solutions to all problems in medicine lie in greater knowledge of every molecule in the human body.
The question is whether reductionism is the only approach for the future development of science and medicine, and whether reductionism is sufficient to study music, living organisms, and other complex systems. The situation of biological and medical research nowadays is somewhat like trying to study how an orchestra (fig. 12.2) would approach playing a beautiful and harmonious symphony with a reductionist approach. The first step would be to divide the orchestra into its three major constituents: the stringed instruments, the percussion instruments, and the wind instruments. This mirrors the way the human body is divided into the respiratory system, the circulatory system, the digestive system, and the nervous system. Reductionism can be continued by dividing the stringed instruments into harps, double basses, cellos, violas, and violins, similar to the digestive system being divided into the mouth, stomach, intestines, and so on. If the violins were then further divided into first violin, second violin, and third violin, the level of reduction would have reached the basic organs of the orchestra—the individual musical instruments.
In order to maintain the good health of every instrument in the orchestra, its individual components must be considered. In the case of the first violin, for example, each component, including the bow, the body, the neck, the bridge, and the strings, must be individually examined to ensure they are functioning properly.
Taking the process of reductionism one step farther, in addition to considering the components of the violin, the materials that compose them must also be investigated. Thus the way in which the molecules combine to constitute these materials must be assessed. The wood of the body is a decisive factor in making a good violin, so molecular research into the materials of the violin is as important to the orchestra as research into molecular biology is to medicine.
Figure 12.2. Studying a symphony using reductionist thinking.
This type of detailed scientific research would inevitably be a valid approach. Research at the molecular level would definitely have the potential to improve the quality of every instrument in the orchestra. However, it is readily apparent that knowledge of all the molecules in all the instruments in an orchestra would not guarantee the quality of a symphony. The knowledge of the anatomic structure of a musical instrument and the inherent molecules is only a necessary condition to play good music. It is not a sufficient condition.
In order to perform a successful symphony, every instrument requires a skilled musician to play the instrument with the appropriate rhythm, which has nothing to do with knowledge of the molecules. All musicians in the orchestra have to exhibit a high degree of coordination to achieve the correct dynamic space structure of all the vibrations involved. This cooperation cannot be studied with reductionist thinking: holistic thinking is required to study a symphony. Nowadays, increasing numbers of doctors are introducing some aspect of holistic forms of medicine into their practice. This implies that more medical doctors are becoming aware of the limitations of reductionist thinking and are aware that molecular biology lies at the end of the road of reductionism in medical research.
Despite the growing prominence of holistic approaches to health care, most biologists remain engaged in reductionist research because it appears that they have no other choice. Holism is a great ideal with positive connotations, but such idealistic notions appear at odds with practical scientific research. In reality, the different cultures in our world possess different ways of thinking. Within these different modes exists the means to study a complex system using practical methods and practical mathematics. To illustrate these new approaches to scientific research of complex systems, let us consider the major differences in thinking between what may be considered the Yellow River culture and the Nile River culture.
Different Structures of Thinking
Around seven thousand years ago, there were approximately twenty different major cultures. Most developed along rivers, and most disappeared. Today, only two of these ancient cultures still have a major influence on present-day styles of thinking: The culture that developed along the Yellow River in China, and the one that developed along the Nile River in Egypt.
It is interesting to compare the different ways of thinking in the two cultures. The image at right in figure 12.3 depicts the pyramids in Egypt, which are symbolic of the Nile River culture. It disappeared with the rise of Muslim empire, but its basic framework of thinking is exhibited in the stories about Moses, who was born, raised, and educated in Egypt. This culture mixed with Greek culture and became the basis of Western thinking, and thus the basis of modern science and Western medicine.
The image at left in figure 12.3 depicts the Great Wall of China, representative of the Yellow River culture. Geographic impediments like the Great Wall isolated its development from the Nile Culture until the twentieth century, and consequently it is possible to discern fundamental differences between Eastern and Western thinking.
The traditional symbols for medicine in these two cultures are indicative of the different modes of thought. The image at left in figure 12.4 depicts the tai-chi, which is central to the I Ching, the “Classic of Transformations” text written four thousand years ago. The image at right in figure 12.4 is the copper snake in the 3,500-year-old story of Exodus in the Bible. The differences in the structure of medical thinking can be seen in these two images.
Figure 12.3. Two different ways of thinking: Yellow River culture and Nile River culture.
Figure 12.4. Basic structures of Eastern and Western thinking.
The central idea of the tai-chi is the dynamic balance between yin, depicted in black, and yang, in white. It represents a permanently rotating interaction of the two; in terms of modern physics, this can be regarded as a form of dynamic oscillation. The basic structure of thinking in Traditional Chinese Medicine concerns this dynamic balance. Illness in a patient stems from some sort of imbalance, and the role of medical treatment is to help the patient regain dynamic balance.
In the story of Exodus, the copper snake was used by Moses to heal patients. The symbol represents the use of powerful methods to conquer disease. This is the basic idea of Western medicine.
Further insight into the difference between Eastern and Western thinking can be discerned by comparing the five elements theory of ancient China with the five elements theory of ancient Greece (fig. 12.5). In the Greek five elements theory, the structure of the elements is linear and proceeds vertically, like the structure of the copper snake. This can be contrasted with the nonlinear structure of China’s five elements theory, where two sets of relationships, “producing” and “suppressing,” interact in a network that possesses neither beginning nor end.
The structure of the mathematics underlying the two systems of thought gives further detail as to their inherent differences. The left image in figure 12.6 is a representation of the I Ching, the technical development of the tai-chi, which lies at the center of the diagram.
The I Ching develops the idea of dynamic balance by describing it with digitized data, using a longer stick (
) and two shorter sticks (
). These can be thought of as corresponding to the binary numbers 1 and 0, respectively. Therefore, the tai-chi can be further developed using these single-digit binary numbers. This extrapolates the 1 (representing yang) and the 0 (yin) in the center of the I Ching to the possible combinations of the three binary numbers: 000, 001, 010, 011, 111, 110, 101 and 100. In the third concentric level of the I Ching, the three-digit combinations can be further compounded into all the possible six-digit combinations: 000000, 000001, 000010, and so on, to 111111, and finally to 100000. Additional levels can be developed using the same principle, but the basic structure remains a circular network. Again, there is no beginning or end to this structure.
Figure 12.6. The structure of the I Ching and the structure of the Elements.
The diagram on the right in figure 12.6 depicts the structure of the axiomatic system, first presented by the Greek mathematician Euclid around 300 BCE in his classical text Elements, which sets out the rules of Euclidean geometry. The axiomatic system provides the basic standardized model of any modern scientific theory. Its structure is like a tree, starting with the roots at the bottom and ending with the smallest branches. Like the structure of the copper snake or the five elements theory of ancient Greece, this structure always develops upward.
A series of axioms form the basis and foundations of a theory. An axiom usually arises from an observation or experience that cannot be inferred from more fundamental knowledge. In other words, an axiom is a boundary between the unknown world and a collection of empirical knowledge, which can be experimentally verified but cannot be arrived at through logical inference, and therefore lies at the frontiers of our rational knowledge.
The axiomatic system is accompanied by a definition system that assigns a clear and fixed meaning to all terminology. This allows us to avoid misunderstanding in the procedure of rational inference. Together with the labor of countless mathematicians over many generations, this rigorous system has allowed many theorems to be generated. The axioms and definitions form the roots of a big tree, while the many theorems are the trunk, twigs and flourishing leaves. The elegance of the tree structure meant it became the standard model for modern scientific theory. Euclid’s example of reasoning equipped future generations of scientists with the rigorous means to achieve a magnificent accumulation of knowledge.
When the treelike structure of the axiomatic system is compared to the circular structure of the I Ching, it becomes evident that the treelike model is not the only way to structure theories. However, the strong influence of its style of thinking results in almost all modern scientific theories being linear. The 1970s saw a growing realization within the scientific community of the limitations of linear thinking, which led to the study of “nonlinear problems.” In terms of linearity, the structures of the Egyptian pyramids, the medical symbol of the copper snake, the Greek five elements, and Euclidean geometry are all linear structures: they possess clear beginnings and ends.
Interestingly enough, some recent considerations of the Big Bang theory move away from linearity to some degree, with the supposition that once its expansion concludes, the universe will contract with all it contains into a black hole that will birth a new Big Bang. In other words, the end of this world would be the beginning of a new one. This is a circular theory, without beginning or end, rather than a linear development with a clear beginning and end.
The study of complex systems that cannot be divided into small parts has also led many physicists to become aware of the limits of reductionism. This awareness is tied to the consideration that the whole is bigger than the sum of its parts.
Synergetics and the Study of Complex Systems
The last three decades have seen movement toward the scientific study of complex systems. Hermann Haken (born 1927) of Freiburg University in Germany can be considered one of the pioneers in studying complex systems seriously and rigorously in accordance with the standards of modern science. He proposed the idea of synergetics to explain the formation and self-organization of patterns and structures in open systems that are far from an equilibrium state. His approach divided a system into many subsystems that work together cooperatively and with coordination. Using this method, he identified the long-term and short-term parameters in a system to explain its behavior.
This area of study has continued to grow, and currently many groups in different countries are engaged in the study of complex systems. These include Hans-Jürgen Stöckmann and Bruno Eckhardt of Marburg University, who concentrate on the study of complex systems and chaotic waves, as well as at least eight special institutes located around the world. Today, more and more talented physicists are venturing into this challenging research area.
The study of economics represents another field where complex systems confront us. Economics has become increasingly important since the end of World War II, leading to the establishment of the Nobel Prize for economics in 1969. The purpose of studying economics is to discern the rules or laws of highly complicated economic systems.
In studying complex systems, the limitation and weakness of reductionism increasingly become obvious. In order to continue to advance our understanding, new mathematics and new ways of thinking have to be introduced.
The body and mind—the object of medicine, biology, and psychology—is obviously a complex system, perhaps the most complicated system facing us. The reintroduction of some holistic forms of medicine from various ancient cultures is recent, and the focus has been on developing the effectiveness of the techniques and trying to explain their function in terms of modern science. This may require scientists to explore different modes of thinking from various cultures to develop modern science to meet this challenge.
Combining Different Ways of Thinking
It must be admitted that it would have been impossible to develop, or even initiate, modern science without reductionism and linear thinking. This is perhaps why modern science developed in the West and not in the East. Science had to develop from simple systems to complex systems, from the study of linear problems to the study of nonlinear problems.
As things currently stand, the medical profession is in the position of having embraced numerous ancient Eastern therapies as well as other holistic treatments without knowledge of the underlying mechanics. This lack of understanding is not their fault; considerable effort has been made to explain these therapies within Western medicine’s framework. Medical professionals have also introduced many modern techniques, such as electronic measurement, electric stimulation, soft-laser stimulation, extra-weak microwave stimulation, and colored-light stimulation to augment these ancient therapeutic methods with modern technology.
The underlying challenge is how to combine Eastern and Western thinking to extend the ability of modern science while maintaining its worthy tradition of strictness. This is the main topic of the final part of this book, which introduces the coherence pyramid, which represents this combination of Eastern and Western thinking.
Integration of Tripartite Thinking: East, South, and West
So reductionism is not the only mode for scientific development, and linear thinking is not the only approach to studying a system. In addition, shielding and isolation are even more limiting. While these methods have a long history of successful scientific pursuits, their limitations are fully exposed when confronted with scientific research into complex systems and holistic medicine.
Both Eastern and Western thinking have their advantages and disadvantages. In the present-day globalized world, a successful fusion of their respective advantages is required to find a new way to further develop modern science, and it is a very important issue for today’s scientists to consider.
In fact, with the current degree of globalization, we should not only consider the different mind-sets of East and West but also look south for an additional mode of thinking that should also be considered. Differences in thinking are a very complex issue, and this book will consider it mainly from the viewpoint of medicine.
Figure 12.7 contains three images that depict completely different views of the human body, from the viewpoints of the ancient Chinese, Greeks, and Indians, respectively. These three different views of the human body evolved into three distinct medical models.
From the perspective of the ancient Greeks, the skeleton is the most important part of the body (middle image in fig. 12.7). Naturally, without the skeleton, the body would be an immobile blob of flesh, and so correct bone structure is a fundamental requirement for health. This viewpoint contributes to the popularity of orthopedic treatments in the West, which can assist with the many ailments that originate from even minor bone dislocations.
The skeleton of an individual is not readily apparent; we never see the skeleton of a living person. Skeletons can only be visualized as a construct in our minds. It is not too difficult to see the skeleton of a corpse, and it was from their study that medicine developed in ancient Greece. Consequently, Western doctors, deeply influenced by the culture of ancient Greece, attach great importance to anatomy and make it the basis of medical education. This is not the case in Chinese medicine.
Modern Western medicine developed rapidly in the United Kingdom, and British doctors were highly motivated to dissect corpses in order to learn more about the body. As the church expressly forbade this practice, the economic reality that scarcity increases value led to profitable clandestine dealings in black-market corpses.
While visualizing the skeleton construct that existed in the minds of the ancient Greeks posed its challenges, these paled in comparison to those facing the Chinese with their the meridian-centered mental construct. A skeleton can be seen inside a dead body, but it is impossible to examine a set of meridians. This is a major reason those disbelieving of Chinese medicine hold that meridians are a fantasy invented by the ancient Chinese.
As if these imperceptible meridians weren’t challenging enough for scientific research, scientists also have to contend with the mystifying Qi, which circulates in the meridians and all around us. The challenge of studying Qi notwithstanding, perhaps the most enigmatic Chinese medical concept is “harmony,” which has no tangible definition at all.
The Indian medical system makes even greater departures from the material world than the Chinese. Similar to meridians, which seem to exist only as a mental construct, traditional Indian medicine envisions chakras in the mental image of the body. It also states that people have seven layers of body, of which only the first layer is visible. While traditional Indian medicine names, describes, and analyzes the other six layers that exist beyond the chemical body, from the viewpoint of modern science, how can they be examined?
More broadly, Western medicine and modern science developed within the Greek framework in a process with no influence from Chinese or Indian thinking. In the last few decades, models of Chinese and Indian medicine have begun to pose challenges to both Western medicine and modern science. This represents a process of cultural fusion, but from a short-term perspective, the experience is a somewhat painful collision. In the long-term, this fusion will produce a new and more beautiful culture. Medicine and science, as part of this culture, will greatly benefit from this integration.
The Past, Present, and Future of the Three Cultural Circles
The past two or three thousand years have seen European culture experience a long process of cultural fusion that has been greatly beneficial. The process led European culture to occupy its currently dominant position. A brief summary of this history can help to develop a better understanding of modern science and medicine.
The relative absence of transportation technology in ancient times saw a wide variety of distinct cultures flourish in different regions of the world, making it a more colorful time. In the opinion of historians, five to seven thousand years ago there were approximately twenty different major civilizations, but over the course of time, many disappeared. Typical fascinating examples are the Incan and Mayan cultures of the Americas. They no longer play a role in modern society and are not likely to have an impact on the future of humanity. More recently, the ancient Australian aboriginal civilization has almost disappeared as a result of the impact of modern civilization. The ancient civilizations of Eurasia and North Africa did not suffer the same fate, instead continuously developing over the past two or three thousand years. They profoundly influence civilization today and will continue to do so in the future.
Figure 12.8. A brief history of the three major cultural circles in Eurasia.
To streamline the discussion, with the assistance of figure 12.8, let us review the history of the development of the three major cultural circles in Eurasia. Relatively speaking, the Indian cultural circle is the simplest of the three because it has experienced the least change in its history. Conversely, the Mediterranean cultural circle, having changed a lot, is the most complicated. We will address these cultures in order of complexity.
Indian Cultural Circle
One of the reasons India’s cultural history is the simplest is that it possesses the least and most unreliable historical data. While this is a seemingly a ridiculous reason for simplicity, it is a reality that must be faced. Although India has been subject to foreign aggression, occupation, and domination, first by the Indo-Iranians, then the Muslims, and finally the British, the influence of its relatively intact ancient culture is still readily apparent in everyday life and in the hearts and minds of the people.
Unlike China, which demolished its ancient culture several times, India’s ancient culture was never subjected to the same self-destruction. This contributes to the Indian culture being the best preserved.
According to the literature, the earliest ancient culture of India can be traced back approximately 3,500 years to the Vedas, a large body of texts written in Sanskrit. This timeframe places them in the era of the Pentateuch, also known as the Torah or the first five books of the Old Testament. The Pentateuch is an almost historical text describing events occurring thousands of years ago and earlier. In contrast, the Vedas are a collection of poems that are not retrospective in nature. This leads many to believe that Indian culture is limited to 3,500 years, but it actually has a much longer history.
The original inhabitants of India did not write the Vedas; the invading Indo-Iranians were responsible. This is also true for the later tomes like the Bhagavad Gita, the Brahmanas, and the Upanishads. The origin of the Indo-Iranians is unclear. They might have come from Iran, Italy, or even Germany, but they were the first group of outsiders to invade India. That being said, the philosophy and worldview reflected in the ancient holy texts are completely different from cultures in Europe or those occupying the much nearer Middle East. Evidently, the Indo-Iranians in India absorbed a lot from the preceding local ancient Indus Valley culture.
The Indo-Iranians made a great contribution by recording their beautiful ancient culture, but as an ethnic minority ruling a local majority, they invented the extremely unpleasant caste system. This divided the population into four castes according to skin color, a practice even more distasteful than the Confucian hierarchy in China. While the caste system was formally abolished in 1947, the impact of its multiple millennia of existence still casts a shadow over present-day Indian society.
The most beautiful products of Indian culture include the principle of nonviolence, the ideas of reincarnation and karma, and the theories of aura, chakra, and the seven-layer body. These ideas will continue to add a beautiful luster to world culture.
The Indian culture’s concepts of aura, chakra, and the seven-layer body play a major role in this book and will have a far-reaching impact on the development of medicine and science. From this point of view, the purpose of this book is to appeal to more people, particularly young readers, to envision a better future for the development of medicine and science.
Chinese Cultural Circle
The Indian culture’s beautiful notions of nonviolence, reincarnation, and karma were peacefully disseminated in China by Buddhist missionaries. They fused deeply with Chinese culture to the point where many present-day Chinese regard them as a part of Chinese culture. Given this, what is the origin of Chinese culture? Many would say Confucianism, but this is incorrect; Confucianism emerged only two thousand years ago.
Taoism is closer to the original Chinese culture. While it has only about 1,800 years of history as a religion, Taoism regards the Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu (571–470 BCE) as its original teacher. Lao Tzu was the contemporary of Confucius (551–479 BCE), who established the hierarchal philosophical base of Confucianism, which became the national religion of China in 134 BCE.
Lao Tzu was also the author of a famous text, the Tao Te Ching, which summarizes the philosophy of the Tao. The word tao in Chinese has two meanings: “speak” as a verb, and “the essence of the world” as a noun. Therefore, the word tao is similar to the Greek word logos, which has the same two meanings.
As the spirit of pursuing the essence of the world, the philosophy of the Tao is really the origin of Chinese culture. Long before the Tao Te Ching was the I Ching, as old as the Vedas and the Pentateuch. The I Ching laid the foundation for Taoist philosophy in China. Unfortunately, many years of civil war subsequently occurred—though not as a result of the Tao—and almost completely destroyed the peaceful Tao culture in China. Lao Tzu actually lived at the end of Tao period, and according to legend, he bemoaned the neglect of the Tao and left China, heading west.
In 221 BCE, China was finally unified by force. To assist in maintaining a highly centralized empire, Confucianism was established as the national religion by imperial decree in 134 BCE. Since that time, China has had a perfect unification of state and religion, far stronger than any that existed in Europe.
At that time in Europe, while the pope had theocratic authority, he had no military or political power. Conversely, numerous warlords and bandits enjoyed military power and political power but did not have theocratic legitimacy, and needed the pope to extend his authority to them by crowning them. This allowed them to become divinely appointed kings in the eyes of the population, and in exchange they collected the 10 percent tithe for the church.
In China, with the national religion of Confucianism in place, the emperor became the “sole son of heaven”—in addition to possessing political and military power, the emperor was also the theocratic authority. This era ushered in the Literary Inquisition, where intellectuals faced official persecution for their writing. This happened under each of the ruling dynasties and continues even today. Much like the Dark Ages in Europe, this discouraged thinkers and creative ideas, which impeded the development of science and technology.
It cannot be said that impeding critical thought and creative ideas under Confucianism served no purpose. The Literary Inquisition combined with a strict social hierarchy that made the central government very powerful. Europe and China were both unified for the first time in the second century BCE, but while Europe’s unification was relatively short-lived, China remains unified to this day.
The second advantage of Confucianism’s strict social controls is that it is very effective for military actions. Establishing Confucianism as the national religion solved the problem of harassment by nomads and greatly expanded China’s territory. Unlike India, which was subjected to foreign rule for most of its history, China successfully assimilated outsiders into Confucianism on two occasions.
The success of Confucianism shared many similarities with the success of Islam, which also effectively used unification of thought to unify the Arab people, providing them strength and greatly expanding their territory. In addition to its great military victories, Islam was also notable for its success with internal management. The combination of unified thought, literary control, patriarchal social structure, and other factors allowed them to establish what some, depending on their definition of harmony, might consider a perfectly harmonious society. Naturally, this kind of military and internal success comes at the expense of freedom of thought, personal freedom, and even human dignity.
While Europe had the thousand-year-long Middle Ages of constrained thought and Islamic countries spent more than 1,400 years in a similar state, China has endured a similar state lasting over two thousand years. China is currently approaching the end of the medieval period, and thus a period similar to the Renaissance is just around the corner.
As Europe neared the end of the Middle Ages, its economy flourished, ushering in the abundantly rich and beautiful Renaissance. Among its other achievements, it bequeathed plentiful beautiful artworks to future generations and brought about the Reformation, which led to profound changes in thought. One of these was the belief that everyone is a child of God. This change posed complications for governance: everyone might be a child of god, but not all of them could be kings. Ultimately, democracy became the system of governance for many nations.
Even though this period included much tension, anxiety, struggle, and violence, it was also a golden age that included the Renaissance in Italy and the Elizabethan era in England. Stubbornly entrenched outmoded ideas fighting to retain control slowly and incrementally made way for new ideas. The industrial revolution and the scientific revolution appeared in Britain and changed the world.
Given that China is at the end of its medieval period, there is reason to be optimistic that a wonderful new golden era is approaching.
Mediterranean Cultural Circle
Some Chinese scholars contend that the European and American culture, which dominates the world today, is a fusion of Hebrew and Greek cultures. Neither are original ancient cultures. As shown in figure 12.8, the Mesopotamian and Nile civilizations were established long before the Hebrew and Greek cultures.
Both the Tigris-Euphrates Valley, home to Mesopotamia, and the Nile Valley possessed geographic characteristics that left these civilizations overly vulnerable to nomadic invasion and destruction. As a result, both declined long before the classical era, known for its many great philosophers in both the East and the West. Travel and trade in the area led to many of the positive attributes of Mesopotamia and the Nile civilization being absorbed by the Hebrew and Greek cultures, which then fused and gradually evolved into the cultural base for Europe and the modern Americas.
Starting from Abraham, according to biblical history, Hebrew culture has existed for at most four thousand years. The original Hebrews migrated from the Tigris-Euphrates Valley to Canaan, located where modern-day Israel is. From a geographical viewpoint, it is evident that Israel occupied a channel or bridging position between the great Mesopotamian and Nile civilizations. Two hundred years later, the Hebrews migrated again, this time to Egypt, where they lived for four hundred years. When they ultimately returned to establish Israel, they had been deeply influenced by the Nile culture, which, combined with their Mesopotamian origins, gradually formed the unique Hebrew culture.
From the time of Moses (circa 1526–1446 BCE) to that of Malachi (circa 440–430 BCE), it took almost a thousand years for a unique and systematic Hebrew culture to form. Its nature is exhibited in the Hebrew Bible, the source of Christianity’s Old Testament, which clearly and meticulously expresses their worldview and their faith. The dutiful, objective, and rigorous writing style of the Hebrew Bible also established a standard that future cultures could aspire to for recording their own history. Both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament contain detailed records of many historical figures and events that can withstand strict archaeological examination.
In contrast, India’s historical records are somewhat unreliable. Even where an important figure like Gautama Buddha is concerned, there is considerable uncertainty about when he was born and died. In different Indian literary sources, the discrepancy can be as large as a hundred years.
Even more notable and unique is the Hebrews’ willingness to face their national scandals. For example, even when writing about their most celebrated hero, King David, they faithfully record all his faults. The Hebrew Bible vividly describes how he seduced another man’s wife and then arranged for man’s death. Similarly, almost all the prophets in the Hebrew Bible, whose writings constitute one-third of its length, are highly critical of their own people. That this level of cultural scrutiny and reporting of scandalous events is present in a holy text is particularly notable.
This acceptance of recording history that is critical of authority is not present in Chinese culture. Sima Qian (145–86 BCE), considered by many to be the greatest Chinese historian, suffered imprisonment and castration for recording work disputing government officials’ rendition of historical events.
In addition to providing a standard for future historians and politicians to aspire to, the Hebrews’ willingness to face the negative aspects of their history also inspired a worthy tradition in science. Nowadays referred to as the “spirit of science,” its significance was eloquently summarized by the scientific philosopher Karl Popper (1902–1994):
Science is one of the very few human activities—perhaps the only one—in which errors are systematically criticized and fairly often, in time, corrected. This is why we can say that, in science, we often learn from our mistakes, and why we can speak clearly and sensibly about making progress there.1
In 30 to 70 CE, Paul the Apostle brought Hebrew culture and the teachings of Christ from the Middle East to Europe. At that time, Greek had become the common language in the Roman Empire, occupying a status equivalent to the English language in modern times. Consequently, Paul and his Hebrew companions wrote the New Testament in Greek.
In a sense, the New Testament is a fusion of Hebrew culture and Greek culture, and it can be considered that first such fusion. Three centuries later, the New Testament and the Old Testament were put together as the Christian Bible, which served as the cultural basis for Europe and the United States and thus casts the largest influence on modern international culture.
The Greeks, also known as the Hellenes, exhibited both deep thinking and a practical attitude. Greece occupies mountainous terrain with very few plains, which impeded the development of a centralized empire and its inherent restraint on thought. It was formed by many small independent poleis, or city-states, that exhibited large diversity in thought. Historically, Greeks enjoyed significant freedom of thought, and they invented the world’s oldest democratic system.
Greece’s long Mediterranean coast facilitated travel and commerce, which, together with geographic proximity to the great ancient civilizations of Mesopotamia, the Nile, and Persia, allowed for significant cultural input. At the same time, it was sufficiently distant from these civilizations to be able to develop independently.
The decline of Mesopotamia, the Nile, and Persia coincided with the dawn of the classical era, where Greek culture rose to a position that matched the great periods of the ancient Chinese and Indian civilizations. The classical era produced many outstanding thinkers in the East, West, and South of the Eurasian continent. Given that the undeveloped state of travel and communication precluded any sort of international sharing of philosophical ideas, the reason for the simultaneous emergence of so many great thinkers poses an interesting question.
Underdeveloped travel and communication made it possible for different civilizations to develop different modes and frameworks of thinking. This is particularly true for cultures as geographically separated as those in the East and the West. Also, perhaps more importantly, the rise of ancient Greek culture illustrates that the coalescence of different cultures is often fruitful. The intersection of the Hebrews and the Greeks was one of these prosperous unions.
Over a thousand years later, European culture was influenced by a second fusion of Hebrew and Greek cultures. One of the major instigators of this subsequent interaction was the Crusades (1096–1291), a series of unsuccessful military campaigns with a deservedly tattered reputation. Perhaps their only positive historical contribution was that a large number of ancient Greek texts were brought back to Europe among the plunder. This outcome ultimately brought about the Renaissance.
In the early stages of the Roman Empire, Greek culture enjoyed a respected position, but after three hundred years, the Roman Catholic Church became the official religious authority of the Roman Empire and started its own version of the Chinese Literary Inquisition. This intolerance extended to existing Greek culture, which was viewed as heresy. Not wanting to be persecuted, many Greeks fled overseas, taking a large number of ancient texts with them. The subsequent centuries of upheaval saw the Europeans gradually forget the profound philosophy of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, along with the beautiful sculptures, paintings, poetry, and dramas as well as the science, medicine, and other riches of Greek civilization.
Encountering so many treasures of ancient Greek civilization had a profound impact on European society. In the context of the depressing life of Middle Ages Europe, ancient Greek culture was dazzling. This led to a movement to revive ancient Greek culture, which is the meaning of the word Renaissance.
At this time, Europe was in the later Middle Ages, and capitalism had already started to rise, accompanied by a new bourgeoisie. This burgeoning social class wanted more power and freedom, putting it at odds with the Vatican, which, after a thousand years of theocracy, had become very corrupt. Given an emerging class agitating for change and vested-interest groups trying to maintain the establishment, conflict was unavoidable. Starting with the publication of Dante Alighieri’s Divine Comedy in 1321 and culminating in Britain’s Glorious Revolution in 1688, the struggle lasted more than three hundred years. Aspects of it are referred to as the Renaissance and the Reformation. The outer layer of this major shift involved literary and artistic change, while the inner layer involved a deep change in the human mind.
The Divine Comedy, which represents the beginning of the Renaissance, is a long poem divided into three parts—Hell, Purgatory, and Paradise—that describe Dante’s travels through these realms of the dead. Along the way he meets many departed souls, both virtuous and villainous, in their appropriate realms. It presented many inflammatory ideas, most notably consigning the contemporary pope and two of his recent predecessors as being condemned to hell.
The Reformation can be considered to stem from the efforts of John Wycliffe (1328–1384), a professor at Oxford University. He produced the first English version of the Bible and claimed that its authority was superior to that of the church. He also said that believers were accountable to Christ rather than the church. Obviously, these sentiments were not well received by the pope and church authorities. Thirty years after Wycliffe’s death, he was declared a heretic, and it was decreed that his books be burned and his remains exhumed. In 1428, at the command of Pope Martin V, his remains were dug up, burned, and the ashes cast into the River Swift.
Another important character at the beginning of the Reformation was Jan Hus (1372–1415), president of Charles University in Prague. Influenced by Wycliffe, he promoted a similar view that later deeply influenced Martin Luther (1483–1546) and John Calvin (1509–1564). In 1414 Pope John XXIII investigated Hus and had the Archbishop of Constance imprison him, and eventually burn him at the stake, his ashes thrown into the Rhine River.
The Renaissance and Reformation contain too many similar grisly stories of persecution. Often described as a golden or great era, it was a turning point and a time of rapid change, where old ideas and systems staunchly resisted eviction from the historical stage. The birth of new ideas and systems exacted a high price in turmoil, conflict, and suffering.
Basic principles of the Renaissance and Reformation that spread incrementally from Europe included the idea that everyone is a child of God, with the associated right to dignity and authority. This inevitably led to the emergence of democratic systems and ideological emancipation. Freedom of thought allowed people to direct their intelligence where they wanted, and subsequently inventors and scientists emerged. In the United Kingdom, the first Protestant country, the industrial and scientific revolutions followed. In the end, these basic principles made European and American culture, with its roots in the fusion of Greek and Hebrew culture, the world’s dominant culture.
The industrial revolution is not a theme of this book, but scientific revolution is. Modern science is the consequence of the Renaissance and Reformation, and thus it ultimately stems from the Hebrews and Greeks. The essence of modern science can be divided into the scientific spirit and the scientific method.
Put simply, the scientific spirit is the spirit of inquiry and getting down to the bedrock—essentially asking “why” endlessly followed by “why.” In the words of Copernicus, the spirit of science is the spirit of pursuing the truth. It also encapsulates the spirit and courage of self-criticism and the resolution to criticize authority. As such, it can be considered a descendant of the Hebrew culture, which established the first model of this.
The scientific method incorporates the methods of severity, systematic approach, objectivity, rationality, logic, repeatability, quantification, numeration, and formulation. This series of methods was first established by Aristotle, perfected by Euclid in the Elements, and ultimately became the standard for modern science. Given its origins in ancient Greek culture, the scientific method can be considered the Greek method.
The success of modern science, technology, and industry as well as economic and military development has seen European and American culture dominate for the last five hundred years. Consequently, other countries with other cultures, regardless of their feelings about the dominant culture, have had to learn modern science and technology from Europe and the United States. They brought knowledge of science and technology home as an absolute truth. This led to a veneration of modern science to the effect that anything, regardless of its true merit, could become revered and beyond doubt as long as it was labeled scientific. Examples of this include so-called scientific socialism and the scientific development viewpoint.
The scientific method, based on ancient Greek culture, is easy to understand, handle, and express. It is also clear, diligent, and well organized. Conversely, the scientific spirit, based on ancient Hebrew culture, is difficult to express, teach, and learn. In terms of Chinese philosophy, it can be thought of as Tao instead of skill. In the words of Lao Tzu, “The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao.”2 Thus, the great majority of those who traveled to Europe and the United States to study science and technology learned only the Scientific Method without picking up the scientific spirit.
Even worse, those who returned having learned only the scientific method brought it back to enshrine as a pillar of unquestionable truth. This led to beautiful, vivid, and dynamic modern science with its spirit of exploration and self-criticism being transformed into an ugly and stern relic, existing to be worshipped and to intimidate those who dare question its power and reliability.
The deification of modern science is evident when the theoretical framework of Classical Chinese Medicine conflicts with the framework of modern science. Typically the questions raised are along the lines of, “Is Chinese medicine scientific or not?” and “Is it possible to prove Chinese medicine by means of modern science?” Questions that are seldom heard include, “What new issues can Classical Chinese Medicine raise in modern science to enrich it?” and “What challenges can Classical Chinese Medicine deliver to modern science in order to further develop it?” Even rarer are, “What deficiencies in modern science are revealed by the practice of Chinese medicine?” and “How can the research of Classical Chinese Medicine further develop modern science?” These last four questions are the main themes of this book.
In the context of culture, the underpinnings of modern science can be considered the Hebrew spirit and Greek methodology. It contains neither ancient Chinese nor Indian cultures, both of which are reputable and possess great wisdom. Therefore, the important issue is whether we can integrate the Hebrew spirit with ancient Chinese methodology and Indian methodology to further promote the development of modern science. From the perspective of medical science, the different aspects of the cultures can be described as follows: Hebrew culture provides the soul, Greek culture provides a body with flesh and blood, Chinese culture provides the breath of life, and Indian culture provides the beautiful aura of life.
In literature it is impressive when a writer can vividly describe the appearance of a person. However, if we carefully consider the person described, it is a body with flesh and blood but without breath, aura, and soul. It is not a living person, but a walking corpse. This is exactly how the human body is described in Western medicine and modern science. It is also how it is described in ancient Greek culture. If the Hebrew, Chinese, Indian, and Greek cultures can be combined, it might be possible to develop a more complete understanding of ourselves as well as a truer representation of the world.
This book, especially the final three chapters, represents the outcome of the collision and fusion of various cultures. The result is to scientifically, holistically, and quantitatively measure and calculate the concepts of beauty and coherence in order to enrich a dawning new golden age. The intended purpose of this book is to introduce some existing relevant knowledge of physics to enable the ancient Chinese and Indian medical systems to be seen from the perspective of modern science. It might be more important to hope that readers can observe that when ancient Chinese and ancient Indian cultures collide with modern science, beautiful new growth can arise.
I believe we are at the dawn of a new golden age. It is my hope that this book serves to provide a paving brick in a new path that leads to a new, more expansive, and more beautiful realm of science—a new heaven and a new earth.