Isaac,
I do not agree. My mother tongue is french and I I have been reading Mel's
post for almost 4 years.
I always appreciate that not only his English is quite clear and precise,
but his posts offer explanations about things that are more
"epistemological" (read clear and simple) than explanations I was offered at
university.
As my late mother said: "the slope always goes downward".
Make an effort to lift yourself up.
Make it simple but not simpler.
Noemi
-----Original Message-----
From: Neumann Isaac Rutger, Granheim
<[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: 04 January 2001 07:35
Subject: SV: Holism
>Mel,
>
>Please don't write all this difficult words. Plain, simple language please
>for all the people in non-english speaking countries (I don't know and I'm
>not interested to know what "epistemology" means).
>
>No offence, huh? :)
>
>Isaac
>
>-----Opprinnelig melding-----
>Fra: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>Sendt: 3. januar 2001 17:26
>Til: [log in to unmask]
>Emne: Holism
>
>
>On 1/3/01, Anne Marie Newman<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
><< Dear colleague, Have you read Celestine Prophecy? I cannot perceive
>what
>is
>the tone of your post. Do you want to help us to open our mind ? Are you
>sarcastic? Do you think that anything could be applied to our practice?
>Let
>me know. I would be very interested in going further in this field. I
>believe in "holistic" approach to treatment. Do we have a wrong perception
>of
>the meaning of holism ? >>
>
>*** Scientifically, it is possibly more acceptable to refer to multifaceted
>or multimodal treatment which allows one to optimise the application of one
>or more methods over a given period in the recovery process. Even then,
the
>physicist, David Bohm. wrote very convincingly about "Holism and The
>Implicate Order", so that holism is hardly a "dirty word" in serious
>quarters!
>
>Unfortunately, the world of alternative medicine has annexed Jan Smuts'
>original use of the term and sometimes denigrated its value. Anyway, I am
>pretty sure that this topic does not warrant too much analysis, since it
>will
>all boil down to an exercise in semantics. I simply wished to offer some
>of
>the epistemology of the term, "holism". I fail to see where I was being
>sarcastic. If one applies "holistic" methods or multifaceted methods
which
>produce successful and rapid healing, who are we to argue interminably
about
>the name given to the many sided approach?
>
>Yes, I have read the Celestine Prophecy and several other autobiographical
>novels like that, including Lobsang Rampa's "Third Eye" and several by
>Carlos
>Casteneda. Also "Alice in Wonderland" and "Through the Looking Glass",
>which were far more conceptually exciting than any of those books. Nothing
>really original about the revelations in these very entertaining,
>self-indulgent books, all of which all constitute an exquisite blend of
fact
>and fiction in different proportions. For instance, all the Nine key
>secrets to life which the "Celestine Prophecy" claims to disclose have
>appeared in different forms in many other tales and texts. Well written
and
>well commercialised, but not very revealing about anything.
>
>We could safely read about any of its disclosures on the Internet without
>hunting through some primitive jungles of Peru pursued by government agents
>trying to stop you from revealing the secret documents. Just another
>something like "Raiders of the Lost Ark" and other similar swashbuckling
>tales! There are many more mentally demanding and scientifically
suggestive
>'secrets' in the writings of people like Robert Anton Wilson ("Cosmic
>Trigger", "The Illuminati Papers" etc). By the way, what is the relevance
>of the "Celestine Prophecy" to the Smuts concept of holism?
>
>Dr Mel C Siff
>Denver, USA
>http://www.egroups.com/group/supertraining
>
>
|