Nov 04, 2007 18:11
For the past several months, I have been living in an area where I am more or less isolated by language. I only have one other fluent English speaker who I encounter in my day to day life, and as a result, we both spend a lot of time together, talking about our days and expressing different ideas an abstract concepts.
One problem, I am encountering, is that my friend is a strong Christian, while I am an Atheist. I am learning that more than our views on the existence of a certain invisible magical sky pixie differ. To prevent any unnecessary friction in our relationship, I avoid discussion of religion, theology and Christian mythology. Unfortunately, in his opinion, many other topics relate back to religion, and I am having to bite my tongue more and more, and avoid more and more discussions that may lead to offence. Anything involving ethics or cultural differences of any kind are off-limits. Our whole world view and way of understanding life itself differ greatly.
Mountains
Just today, while driving past a beautiful mountain range, I was asked what I thought of when I see such a marvelous sight. I responded with “erosion, plate tectonics and continental drift can do some wonderful things” He thought that was a ‘cold’ way of looking at the world. He saw mountains as being ‘proof’ of intelligent design, a sign that their must be some sort of greater intelligence out there, an artists, sculpting such beauty in our world for us to enjoy. I find that to be very shallow and egotistical. Why would you look at a scene filled with such beauty, but rather than admiring it in all its glory and wonder, thinking about what a truly fantastic ball of rock we live on; instead, you think that a mountain is simply not good enough on its own, some special being that we can never see or feel must have made it for us. It is also quite an egotistical view. What makes you so damned important that a supreme being of incalculable intelligence and complexity would go to all the trouble of hand crafting a mountain, just so you can say ‘golly, that sure is pretty’
Medicine
Later that same day, I was talking about a quote by by John Diamond regarding alternative medicine. “There is really no such think as alternative medicine, just medicine that works, and medicine that doesn't”. He accused the man of having a Western mindset that pushed other traditions and cultures’ traditions aside. He spoke of Eastern medicine, and how greatly it differs from Western medicine, as an example of how ‘my way’ isn’t the only way.
His argument was that medicine is a deeply cultural thing, and placing one cultures medicine over another’s was wrong, its like saying “our culture is better than yours”. It is his opinion that it is wrong to say that Western medicine is better than all the rest.
So I asked him, If an American has diabetes, and needs regular injections of insulin, does it matter to him that insulin was a Canadian discovery? If he does not fully appreciate the contributions of Banting and Best, and still mocks us for saying ‘a-boot’ and ‘eh’ will the insulin be any less effective? If someone were to devise a cure for the common cold, what would it matter if it was invented by a German scientist in and efficient and elegantly designed lab, or a Chinese man in a straw hut? So long as it was proven to be effective, and distributed worldwide, it makes no difference where it came from. If you have a cold, and you run to the store and buy a bottle of this medicine, what difference does its point of origin make to you? Is the performance of the drug altered by recognizing the culture that that drug emerged from? No. Medicine is not cultural. Medicine either helps the sick, or it does not. It either works, or it does not.
I tried to explain to him that if Eastern medicine works as well as Western medicine, then they would pass the same double-blind tests in controlled environments in independent laboratories all over the world. To my knowledge, most of them have never been tested, and the ones that have been tested were shown to be no more effective than taking a placebo. And the placebo effect is much stronger than anyone is willing to admit. Many people, myself included, will feel better if they believe they are taking medicine that will help them. If Eastern medicine, or alternative medicines were to pass these tests, it would no longer be ‘alternative’ medicine, it would be just medicine that has been empirically demonstrated to work, as advertised.
Aspirin is a great example of a medicine that is thought to be in the Western medical tradition. It is certainly not Alternative medicine, because it comes in a bottle at a regular drug store, and it actually works, and has evidence to prove its claims. But it didn’t start out that way. Sure, Ancient Greeks new that a bitter power extract from willow bark made pain hurt less, but it was also widely used by Native American’s as an pain killer and anti-inflammatory. Normally, bitter powders extracted from tree bark or herbs are firmly placed in the ‘alternative medicine’ category. But unlike alternative medicines, aspirin was actually demonstrated to work, and it became real medicine.
At this point, My friend accused me of being a Neo-Colonialist. How dare I openly say that our way is better. It is cultural, it is relative. So I asked him, “What is the one thing that everyone has told us about Korean Medicine?”. The answer has always been “don’t take Korean Medicine, it doesn’t work.”
This advice has even been given to us by Korean-Americans, so the argument that “Korean medicine works on Korean bodies, it is just not meant for European body types” can be easily dismissed. Growing up in North America does not magically turn someone into a person of European decent. If Eastern medicine was equally as good as western medicine, we would not be told to avoid it. The fact that it does not work is evidence that when it comes to medicine, what we have in the West is superior, and accusing me of being a Neo-Colonialist is unfair.
Saying that any kind of knowledge is cultural, or just one of the many different types of knowledge we can use to understand the world is simply wrong. Western scientific knowledge is empirical, thoroughly tested, reviewed, scrutinized, verified (or dismissed) independently, and reproducible in different labs all over the world. Every other type of knowledge is simply taken on faith, originating either from tradition, an authority figure, or someone who just has a gut feeling about something. How can you possibly argue that an untested gut-feeling or tradition stands on equal footing with knowledge that has been thoroughly scrutinized and is backed up with evidence. Just because a belief has been around for a long time, or because it is believed by many people all over the world does not make it true.