Sunday, March 24, 2013

abstract conception is disjoint to concrete conception in western sciences


Why abstract conception is disjoint (වියුක්ත) to concrete conception in western sciences?

For example:
You can accurately imagine a particular man you met as concrete conception, but you cannot accurately imagine a category 'man' as abstract conception.

instance of fictional man class ! = (not equal to) living breathing man with flesh and blood

In western medicine, a doctor prescribes medicine to a category/blueprint 'man', and not to the man who sits in front of him. This disjoint gap looses valuable information (incomplete thinking).
Therefore, western medical science manages the problem as solution. (not complete cure)

In contrast, the native Asian thinking does not consider the said disjoint 'abstract' concepts. (complete thinking without gaps). Medicine is 100% customized.
Therefore, Asian traditional medicine uproots the problem as the solution. (complete cure)

How do western sciences justify the highlighted error in abstract (incomplete) thinking?

Additional Details

@Curtis Edward,
Both abstract and concrete conceptions exist (real imaginary) as creations of mind.
Subjective-objective view of 'abstract man' as 'any thing' is defined withing the context of 'creator God' pyramid. This 'fictional man' (personification) is then assumed as the sensory perceived man.
Can you see the gap in that assumption? Abstract Man do not exactly fit the sensory perceived concrete man. This gap looses valuable information, resulting 'incomplete thinking' and wrong decision making. Can your physical body be accurately described, even by referring to your own shadow?
In Asian thinking, even the observer and observed are one (complete thinking). Solution and problem are not separate.


No comments:

Post a Comment