Background: Chinese medicine has three generations and is very famous. He also reads medical books and various ancient books himself.
Now let's quote his article and talk about what Chinese medicine is.
"Great-grandfather's medical skills are very famous in the countryside, and their ancestors also studied medicine to treat diseases."
Needless to say, he studied medicine from his great-grandfather to his father.
"When I was young, I also tried to browse the ancient medical books in our country and studied the theoretical prescriptions of Chinese medicine. Many of them were introduced from other places. "
When he was young, he "browsed medical ancient books" and knew that a considerable part of theoretical prescriptions of traditional Chinese medicine were imported from other places.
This shows that the theories and prescriptions of Chinese medicine were not produced in China, on the contrary, quite a few of them came from abroad.
"However, I don't believe in Chinese medicine and think that Chinese medicine has specific drugs, which makes no sense."
But he doesn't believe in Chinese medicine and thinks that "Chinese medicine has effective drugs, which is unreasonable". It is acknowledged that Chinese medicine has some effective prescriptions, but there is nothing to pass on in theory. To put it bluntly, experience has some merits, but it is nonsense in theory.
There is a guy upstairs who just thinks that the theory of Chinese medicine is "higher than that of Chinese medicine". Ha ha. Look down again:
"If you have to use it in that era and region, you can. If you claim to be the quintessence of China and are above foreign medicine, then you know nothing about the history of Chinese medicine, and you can almost forget your ancestors? "
That is to say, if it is limited to the times and regions, it is ok to use Chinese medicine, but to hold Chinese medicine as the quintessence of the country and override foreign medicine is to be ignorant of the history of Chinese medicine, or to forget our ancestors for several times.
"On the theoretical level, Chinese medicine is a little higher." This statement is precisely the expression of "boasting about the quintessence of our country and starting foreign medicine, but knowing nothing about the history of our country's medicine, and almost forgetting our ancestors after several classics".
As for pseudoscience, in fact, you don't need to look at the official definition, which is very verbose. Simply put, pseudoscience is to package unscientific things into science and sell them to everyone as scientific things. For example, methanol itself is not fake wine, but it becomes fake wine when it is sold in a bottle.
Most people in China know that science is a good thing and has certain authority, so many things that are not science should be packaged as science.
As for whether Chinese medicine is scientific, we should first look at whether Chinese medicine conforms to scientific methods.
Science = logic+demonstration
There is no logic in the theory of traditional Chinese medicine, let alone argument. For example, the core theory of Yin-Yang and Five Elements cannot be demonstrated by any Chinese medicine practitioner. Compendium of Materia Medica records that drinking the rain of vernal equinox can cure infertility. He also said that "exams are like gods." If it is really empirical, don't say it. Even such a simple and funny prescription cannot be ruled out by demonstration. What is the empirical spirit of TCM?
Therefore, Chinese medicine does not use scientific methods and cannot be classified as science.
So Chinese medicine is pseudoscience?
That depends on how to locate it, just like how to locate methanol. If methanol is positioned as a chemical raw material, it is not fake wine. If it is sold in a bottle, it becomes fake wine. Traditional Chinese medicine is only non-science, but if it must be defined as science, it can only be pseudoscience.
Of course, it is not that Chinese medicine is useless. After all, after thousands of years, there are their own and foreign ones, and there are always some experience methods and prescriptions handed down, bearing the function of treating diseases and saving lives. It's just that TCM theory can't understand diseases more accurately and objectively. In the face of modern medicine with modern science as the background, what can I do to save my life by playing Yin-Yang and Five Elements Metaphysics? That is a disregard for human life.
So Chen Yinque said, "Chinese medicine has a panacea, which is unreasonable." What should Chinese medicine do? Of course, remove the "unreasonable principle" and leave "effective medicine". This is what anti-Chinese medicine often says, "waste medicine (reason) to test medicine." Seeing that the real value of TCM has been preserved for thousands of years and continues to serve human health, it is also possible to let "unreasonable" theories enter museums and apply for inheritance.
As for the reply on the first floor about treating diseases with worldview, it is already very funny.
The same purpose does not mean that you can get the same result.
We all want to go to the moon, but we can't go by bike. Not all roads lead to Rome, otherwise how can there be such a saying as "going astray"?
Some people argue that Chinese medicine is another system, but another system does not mean that this system must be equal to other systems.
The theory that tengu eats the moon is another system to explain the solar eclipse. Can another comprehensive "Tiangou Theory" and "Earth, Moon and Sun Theory" have the same explanatory position?