我覺得中醫是科學，需要修正的是當代的科學概念。但不修正也不要緊，如此，中醫則不算科學，但此非中醫的損失。

As I pointed out before, Chinese medicine has falsifiability 2 (experimentational), without falsifiability 1 (theoretical). To me, this qualifies as science, if, science is understood as any discipline of investigating reality that returns reliable and consistent results.

But if one insists on that a discipline must have f1 and f2 in order to be recognized as science, it is OK too. Perhaps in the near future some f3 will be introduced, and many studies now will be disqualified from being scientific.

 

所有跟帖： 

• 還有就是我粗淺的觀察，西醫很缺乏自己的理論。它的功效其實來自其它學科的加持。 -中間小謝- ♂ (592 bytes) () 01/14/2023 postreply 18:34:55

• 西醫缺乏理論？您可真是什麽都敢說啊；當然，樓下還有“西醫也不是一無是處”這種奇聞怪談 -jinjiaodw- ♂ (0 bytes) () 01/14/2023 postreply 19:00:21

• 人家也會覺得你是奇談怪論，少見多怪。 -為人父- ♂ (167 bytes) () 01/14/2023 postreply 19:06:37

• 也就你和那幾位這麽認為，拚命想把水攪混沒意義 -jinjiaodw- ♂ (0 bytes) () 01/14/2023 postreply 19:20:18

• 你說, 他們幹嘛攪混水? 想摸大魚還是摸大西瓜 : )) -鈴蘭聽風- ♀ (0 bytes) () 01/14/2023 postreply 20:02:08

• 小謝, 你知道嗎? 畢業離開校園後, 西醫學院的醫生很快就進入臨床實踐, 獨擋一麵; 中醫學院的醫生, 從生澀到成熟 -鈴蘭聽風- ♀ (42 bytes) () 01/14/2023 postreply 20:05:30

• 所以我說取消中醫學院，跟班老中醫是最好的成才途徑 -dancingwolf- ♂ (0 bytes) () 01/14/2023 postreply 20:39:11