Talk:Hara hachi bun me

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What's Confucian[edit]

What's Confucian about this? Entenman (talk) 03:01, 6 June 2011 (UTC)entenman[reply]

Not much anymore. Confucianism is where the idea originated. -SusanLesch (talk) 03:10, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you cite a source? Entenman (talk) 03:13, 6 June 2011 (UTC)entenman[reply]

Sure. Go to Amazon.com and read page 77 or page 227 in Buettner's book. Does that help? Does that answer your question? -SusanLesch (talk) 03:24, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Buettner does not cite any sources - he just calls this a "Confucian adage." This may seem like nit-picking, but I think he uses "Confucian" as a loose term for "Asian." 68.117.58.73 (talk) 16:56, 6 June 2011 (UTC)entenman[reply]

Are you a Confucian scholar? Perhaps you could look this up for us. Buettner's book is using Dr. Craig Willcox as a source, and Willcox says in his book, "...unique blend of Taoism and its profound reverence for nature, Confucianism and its deep respect for others...". So I'm sorry but I don't think he means Asian. -SusanLesch (talk) 17:05, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Willcox seems to be using Confucian is a very loose sense, too, and that must be where Buettner got the idea that the diet is Confucian. I don't want to be pedantic, but Confucianism concerns itself with ethics, social relations, government, the relationship between ritual and morality, and so forth - but not diet. (I can't claim to be an expert on Confucianism, but I have taught Chinese and Japanese history for 35 years, and assign the Analects of Confucius to my students.) Maybe a stronger case can be made that there's some Taoist influence here. But just because there's nothing specifically Confucian in this diet doesn't mean it isn't worthwhile, as we can see from the life-expectancy of people in Okinawa. 68.117.58.73 (talk) 17:48, 6 June 2011 (UTC)entenman[reply]

I'm sorry but for now Confucian it is. If you can cite something specific you are of course welcome to do so, but speculating on what Buettner thinks isn't getting me anywhere. What he published in his book is all that counts for a WP:RELIABLE source. I'll add that to the lead for now. Good luck. -SusanLesch (talk) 21:13, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, okay. I don't insist on changing this. But this does raise questions about what counts as a reliable source. Buettner's book was published by the National Geographical Society, a reputable publisher, and from what I can tell from Buettner's webpage, he is an authority about health, diet, and longevity. But he does not seem to have any background in Okinawan or, more broadly, East Asian culture. Anyone familiar with Confucianism would wonder why he describes this diet as Confucian. That's why I think this entry would be better if the word "Confucian" is dropped. I mean it as a constructive suggestion. Entenman (talk) 18:21, 7 June 2011 (UTC)entenman[reply]

I won't stop you from taking it out. (I can't see to remove it myself, because your reasoning is outside the source we have here, and it's apparently conjecture.) -SusanLesch (talk) 18:28, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Or you could actually look it up: Confucius' Discourses on EatingKortoso (talk) 23:32, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think the problem here is coming from conflating the teaching with the saying. The saying is clearly Japanese. However there are similar teachings in other Eastern approaches to health and medicine, for instance Chinese Traditional Medicine and Ayurveda. On that basis I’m moving the Confucian reference to a section within th embody of the article. I’ll also add some refs for CTM and Ayurveda from a book published by well established publishers (tho not academic in nature so somewhat dubious in terms of reliable source. It can be removed if anyone’s unhappy. But I do believe article would be better for separating teaching from phrase. Dakinijones (talk) 16:27, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oops not “th embody” but “the body” :) 

Dakinijones (talk) 16:29, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

increased stomach stretching claim makes no sense[edit]

the article says "... assists in keeping the average Okinawan BMI low due to the delay in stomach stretch receptors indicating satiety results in a constant stretching of the stomach which in turn increases the amount of food needed to feel full ...". So if you need more food to feel full, then 80% of that food will also be more than before. So logically this stretching would result in eating more, not less. I wonder if the book is misquoted. 76.119.30.87 (talk) 02:01, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's a question for Drs. Bradley and Craig Wilcox and Makoto Suzuke to answer. Maybe your answer is in their book "The Okinawa Program : How the World's Longest-Lived People Achieve Everlasting Health--And How You Can Too" Kortoso (talk) 23:20, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The increasing numbers of really fat Okinawans seems to contradict the explanations here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.241.72.9 (talk) 09:14, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Further translations[edit]

Further Wiki versions of this would be great, e.g. German, Spanish, Arabic, Chinese, etc. -- Horst-schlaemma (talk) 21:26, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

日本語で失礼 腹八分は儒教と無関係 言い伝えで言われてる言葉 http://kotowaza-allguide.com/ha/harahachibunme.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 240B:11:C200:2100:B42E:6A6A:F5D2:9ED0 (talk) 03:22, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hara_hachi_bun_me&oldid=1207544581"