After analyzing the sentence “observe pulse and symptoms to infer their causes and then give treatment accordingly”

we believe that theoretical discussions in traditional Chinese medicine fall into two categories: discussions on what and discussions on why. By “observing pulse and symptoms”

we try to answer the question “what” a particular combination of pulse and symptoms is like. By “inferring their causes”

we try to answer the question “why” such pulse and symptoms appear. By giving treatment accordingly

we try to answer the question “how” to deal with them. The last question involves the relationship between pattern manifestations and prescriptions

which can be further reduced to “what” and “why” is the relationship. Therefore

the general principles of traditional Chinese medicine embodied in the above-mentioned sentence can be analyzed from the two angles of what and why. The study of “what” is descriptive research

which leads to descriptive theory. The study of “why” leads to interpretative theory of causality. However

the causality in traditional Chinese medicine is often based on inferring causes from results. Therefore

it is difficult to test and verify the “cause” derived from such analysis because it is not a factual “cause”

but a “cause” in terms of ontological commitment. The main reason why the interpretative theory of traditional Chinese medicine can guide clinical practice is that such interpretative theory is based on a large number of descriptive theories that have been tested and verified.