This comment is felt, and here is a way to go beyond attempts to acculturate reductionist views of ethnocentrist imperial authoritative directional divisions of human scientific enterprise. Dialectic affects, cognitions, and behaviors manifest through ultra-modern (as emergent from post-modern) sciences has emerged concomitant multicultural acceptance (a step beyond tolerance). This evolution in science is more inclusive of various cultures, eschewing authoritative divisions of social structures. This might help. Today, scientific credibility is lost with the words “proven”. “Reconcile” is more through the results of hypothesis testing than various biases at play working to reconcile (the wish to reconcile would bias science). Science does neither, though individual differences in scientists may attempt proofs and reconciliations.
Besides, there’s a whole practicum using RCT’s in TCM with sample sizes that achieve high satisfactoriness with respect to central limit theorem concepts in statistical analysis. TCM research has accelerated phenomenally! For example, Yao et al’s (2023) just published meta-analysis of 19 RCT’s (N=1888) concerning moxibustion without acupuncture for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation finds that moxibustion without acupuncture may be as effective, and may be as effective as drug therapy.
Keep in mind that drug therapies also exhibit placebo effects (i.e., contextual effects) and this effect is controlled for as well (e.g., Hafliðadóttir et al., 2021). According to Hafliðadóttir et al., 54% of the drug effects across 186 trials tested were attributed to contextual effects (pp. 5-7). Though there are limitations, this reality is well known in studies on many drugs, licit and illicit. Social effects of mimicry are at play in drug use as well, but that’s getting onto a tangent, so that complicates placebo effects.
Most science has moved away from binary, polarized, and non-dialectic views of phenomenological effects of treatments, procedures, and therapies. I think Rosenzweig’s (1936) “Dodo Bird Verdict” sheds more light, and applies all over the sciences. However though “everybody has won and all must have prizes” (Carol, 1865) was claimed, later practicum and RCTs demonstrated that some win more prizes than others, but prizes are still split (where shall we split the Lambo?).
With computer assistance, deeper analysis is available to better attribute causation to probabilities (see Markov chains etc.) instead of a propensity to divide causes into cause and lack thereof. Mediation models have gotten quite complex, and I think with respect to martial arts, instructors that are able to embrace the reality that “it’s complex” and develop resiliency to address maladaptive cognitions in search of simplicity in the face of regressive tendencies will be more effective, but that’s a proof these hands avoid, and a reconciliation that seems unnecessary.
I can tell you that an entire practice is in flight… universal experimentation aimed at one thing, improving the health and well-being of living ecologies right down in the moment, and this very post was a demonstration that 武 [does indeed] 産 [to] 合氣. Concepts (i.e., language), culture, and cognition does reciprocally interact, conflict, and function (see linguistic relativism; Exhibit B).
In close, “I’ve been practicing X for N years,” is potentially a confound, as there’s converging evidence that it’s the first 10 years that count most, the rest is probably… a placebo.
初心に… and sincerely,
RÆH, 路意, 牙王, ཀརྨ་བསམ་གཏན་འཕེལ།, [redacted]
P.S.: basics are oft confounded with “cutting cloth to make clothes” mind. to pluralize 香嚴智閑, pictures of rice cakes do not satisfy an army.
Carol, L. (1865). Alice’s adventures in wonderland. Macmillan.
Hafliðadóttir, S. H., Juhl, C. B., Nielsen, S. M., Henriksen, M., Harris, I. A., Bliddal, H., & Christensen, R. (2021). Placebo response and effect in randomized clinical trials: Meta-research with focus on contextual effects. Trials, 22(1), 493. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-021-05454-8
Yao, Y., Zhenni, Z., Fengqin, C., Yufei, L., Xiangtian, P., Xiao, X., & Zhiling, S. (2023). Effectiveness of moxibustion alone on lumbar disc herniation: A Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine, 43(1), 14–26. https://doi.org/10.19852/j.cnki.jtcm.20221108.001