Talk:Medicine man
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, which collaborates on Native American, First Nations, and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| ??? | This article has not yet been rated on the assessment scale. |
|
Suggested article edit guidelines:
|
|
|
Please rate this article and leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. |
|
Contents |
[edit]
Good to see someone writing articles about anthropology, an area in which Wikipedia has been pretty weak so far. I know almost nothing about this topic, so I don't really want to edit the article. But I do think this article needs a lot more of the cultural background of this term, re Native American folk healers. Also, it's hard to say this in a politically correct way, but anyway: many M.D.'s would deny that many people called "medicine men" are actually physicians, in the main sense of this term, literally speaking. Moreover, under this definition, many M.D.'s would count as medicine men, which they are not, literally speaking. --LMS
This article needs a lot of work. Koyaanis Qatsi, Sunday, June 23, 2002
- <<This article needs a lot of work.>>
-
- Agreed. I put up the notice. (I don't know enough about the subject to fix it well.)--Curtis Clark 00:42, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
- That is an understatement. The term medicine is not necessarily a reference to "the healing arts." Rather, it is a reference to supernatural forces and the items and religious practices used to control those supernatural forces. These supernatural forces, items, and religious practices may be used to heal people, but they may also be used for many other purposes.--NetEsq 5:39pm Sep 5, 2002 (PDT)
Moved comments from the main article --
- I am not qualified to edit this page, but I am qualified to ask one applies "healing arts" to a folklore, local or otherwise.
- This is not a sentence. Can someone, anyone help out here?
This may aid your asking for help (I'm relating to healing): medicine men sought in spirit to "see" a "problem" (individual, or whole tribe) before it was able to enter the physical world, so that it may be prevented from happening in the physical world by using their spiritual power (and knowledge in using this power) to "dissipate" the impending problem (a battle on the supernatural level). M.D.'s seek to correct the "individual" problem after it has happened in the physical world. In short, medicine men seek to battle the spiritual "cause" of a potential problem so that the "symptom" of the cause does not enter the physical world... the problem being dissipated at the "spiritual cause", as the aim of a medicine man's deeper purpose, regarding healing (and lore)... keeping evil spirits away, if you like, before they can "effect" the physical world (cause and effect). M.D.'s seek to alleviate the cause after the symptom has presented itself in the physical world. Both are medicine men... one working on the problem in the spiritual world before the problem enters the physical world, as the aim. The other working on the problem in the physical world, after it has entered the physical world. May it be that this helps without offending anyone. White horse (open palm) 8\Mar\06.
More editing necessary:
1) Castaneda is a fraud.
http://skepdic.com/castaneda.html
2) "The worldwide practice of shamanism" doesn't exist. Shamanism is confined to southeastern Siberia. It does not have much at all in common with indigenous North American traditions; in fact, shamanism has more in common with Christianity. Even worse (for "core shamanism" people, at least), the word shaman is derivative of a Chinese word for Buddhist monks. 3) In fact, many Indians consider the word "shaman" offensive because it evokes that "All primitives are identical" image so typical of the 19th century.
[edit] Re: Castaneda is a fraud
Skepdic.com could not be a more libertarianistic vomitfest of "setting the record straight". It may make one's life more content to debunk the nature of psychoactive drugs and their abilities to induce dramatic personal insight. Calling Castaneda a fraud on the basis that his movement was a coincidence of the 1960s and referencing interest with peyote, mescaline, and other organic compounds that initiate an elevated state of conscious awareness in such a cynical manner is not only closed-minded it is completely ignorant and almost offensive to any individual with an ounce of scientific education. Inform yourself, then choose.
The second point I may raise issue with is that while shamanism or any etymological research thereof would conclude that this term is solely characteristic of Siberia, that does not remove the fact that the nature of these individuals remained quite similar. The plants are different, the illnesses may be different, the people are different, but the goal is the same. To use the planet as a means of healing the sick or injured.
Anthropology, ecology, or any humanistic science field will long be neglected if we continue to get fools like you posting information from snopes or skepdic. Please think outside the box and not about it.
- It is a bad practice to call other people "fool," and in general to demean people by any means. Please maintain a civilized environment out here in the Void. P0M 04:17, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Not sure if it's useful
"Medicine Man" But I looked for this movie http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0104839/ So, if it can be added - "Medicine Man" is also a movie. :)
[edit] Medicinal vs. Spiritual
Of the Dakota leaders there are two different roles that could be considered a Medicine man. Sometimes one elder took on the roles of both practices, sometimes there were several "specialized" Medicine men at once. One type, known as Pezuta Wicasta, has knowledge about the plants and whatnot that can cure illnesses, help in child birth, heal wounds, etc. The second type, a Wicasta Wakan, acts as a spiritual interpreter of sorts, as many American Indian cultures belive that when elders die their spirits remain. However, this information is specific to the Dakota tribe and does not cary on to other tribes necessarily. When missionaries came over from Europe their interactions with these different Medicine men varied significantly. As very vew religions accept the existance of other ones, the spiritual beliefs of the Medicine men clashed with the missionaries' views. In contrast the scince that the healing Medicine men practiced was appreciated and respected by the missionaries and relationships were established. One such missionary, named Samual Pond, lived with the Dakota in Minnesota and there are a couple of books about his experiences.
[edit] Rewrite for Medicine Man
It seems like this term is used broadly for different roles in varied societies. Surely each of these societies had their own word for what has been lumped into Medicine Man. It seems like the best use of this article would be to list the other terms it has encompassed, linking each to their own article. It could include a brief history of how and why all these positions got lumped together by Euroethnic documenters.
- I agree with this approach. A user of Wikipedia might reasonably expect to find an article on Medicine Man, and the encyclopedic thing to do would be to provide useful information.--Curtis Clark 19:53, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
- Looking at things from the aspect of their similarities, they are all "the same." Looking at things from the aspec of their distinguishing characteristics, they are all "different." Even in the case of one "religion" that has had a long and voluminous written tradition, Buddhism, what people say is "true Buddhism" can vary greatly from school to school and book to book. To understand how many different traditions of belief and practice have evolved out of a common source it is generally least confusing to begin at the beginning and trace things through. In the case of Shamanism, the task may not be so easy.
If it is true that the beliefs and practices of the Australian aborigines is very similar to the beliefs and practices of shamanism as practiced in northern Asia and in the Americas, then it may be that (1) the ability to shamanize is fairly common among all groups of humans, and/or (2) those who originally populated Australia around 80,000 years ago carried their traditions with them at that early time and have preserved them there with little or no change.
Mircea Eliade made the best attempt I know of to try to objectively describe these beliefs and practices and then make comparisons among them. His book, entitled Shamanism in its English version, is regarded as a classic. I know of nothing to compare it to. It is, I suppose, always possible to pick holes in somebody else's work, but anyone who wanted to start working in this field on a comprehensive basis would need to retrace his researches.
His general position is that regardless of whether possibility (1), possibility (2) or both are valid explanations for particular cases, in general there is so much similarity worldwide among the religious practices he calls shamanism that it looks like something interesting is going on. In such a case the best course is not to try to force the evidence to support one ideology or the other, but to patiently gather the evidence and eventually let it speak for inself.
Even among Native American groups, there are many languages and many words for people who employ similar religious practices. Humans get in trouble when they let language rule over reality. P0M 04:52, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Points needing attention
I have started to try to clear up some of the problems with the current version of this article. I got down to this point--
The medicine man was a very important figure in Native American society. When European missionaries came over to try to convert the Natives into Christianity, the medicine man stood as a major obstacle to the missionaries in trying to convert them.
and decided to delete it. First, it is unsourced. If I thought it was right, or remembered something vaguely along those lines, I might have left it and tried to find a citation to fit. Second, it sounds to me entirely POV. For one thing, use of the word "obstacle" makes it sound like the "medicine men" were out there trying to protect their turf and keep the pure light of Christian revelation out of the eyes of the dupes whom they had under their spell. From reading Lame Deer, Seeker of Visions, and other such sources, I get a different story. What I remember from the two times that I met Lame Deer was that if he had negative feelings toward anyone in this regard it would have been the BIA (Bureau of Indian Affairs), not the local preacher.
One of the problems with the quoted passage is that it pictures a clash of ideologies. The missionary comes in and says, "Jesus died for your sins, and if you do not believe it you will go to hell." (That's what a Lutheran (?) missionary from Finland told me in Kyoto, Japan.) And the "medicine man" trots out his one-line sermon, which is... What? I remember what Lame Deer said one time when commenting on Christians taking a bath in guilt and then copping a plea (my words, not his): "Why don't they forgive themselves and reinvolve themselves with their lives and communities?" (The second half is a paraphrase. I heard his words decades ago.) Anyway, I think the typical Native American "medicine man's" reaction to the ideologies of the various missionaries and preachers would likely have been, "I do not believe it, and I don't see anything that would tend to make me want to believe it." There is no opposing ideology to speak of. There no equivalents to Biblical texts to throw back at the missionaries. But if you don't know anything about the other guy's religion, then you are likely to think it is a "perverted" version of your own, even its negative image, perhaps.
Some of the criticism of the article listed above do not seem to me to correctly interpret what the article currently says. Please point out problematical texts and give specific criticisms. P0M 05:46, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Deleted one paragraph--No need for "phony X" in articles on X
The presence of even a short section on "plastic shamans" tends to overbalance the objective descriptions of the real "medicine men" in the Native American traditions. It's already bad enough to have an article that uses a Euro-centric term (and one that may carry negative connotations due to its similarity and possible connection to "traveling medicine shows").
There is another account of a Native American "medicine man" by John Neihardt. It is older, and written more entirely from the Euro-centric perspective, so it isn't as useful as Lame Deer's book. Another problem is that, if I remember correctly, Neihardt also wrote about the Lakota.
It would be good to get information about a much wider range of people and cultures. I can try to find out something about the Cherokee who remained on the East Coast. I think one person who contributed recently may have some direct personal experience and might be able to put us onto written sources. Then there are the groups that use peyote. My guess would be that someone has written objectively about their religious beliefs and practices, but I don't recall having seen anything.
A broader question in regard to this article is how it is supposed to fit in with other articles. If the article on shamanism is adequate, then this article would only have to detail the distinctive practices of Native American groups, e.g., sweat lodges, sun dance, ghost dance, the sacramental use of smoke, the so-called peace pipe, etc. If I remember correctly, Lame Deer makes mention of the shamanizing practices of other American Indian groups that he has visited. I guess that kind of thing is at least quotable first-person anecdotal information.P0M 19:35, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
