Jul 14 • Nakyoung Lee

[Lecture Review] Exploring the Historical Evolution and Differences Between Traditional Chinese Medicine(TCM) and Traditional Korean Medicine(TKM)

TThe newly uploaded CME lecture, “Exploring the Historical Evolution and Differences Between Traditional Chinese Medicine(TCM) and Traditional Korean Medicine(TKM),” offers a comparative and contextually rich overview of two of East Asia’s most influential medical traditions. Delivered by Professor Namil Kim of Kyung Hee University, this lecture examines the historical evolution, core philosophical tenets, and clinical frameworks of Traditional Korean Medicine (TKM) and Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), with an emphasis on how their distinctions shape modern medical identity and practice.
It is our great pleasure to welcome you to the 2025 Integrative and Korean Medicine Training Program, proudly organized by Jaseng Medical Academy and sponsored by the National Institute of Korean Medicine Development.
This comprehensive 23-hour online program is designed to introduce healthcare professionals from around the world to the foundational principles and advanced clinical applications of Integrative and Korean Medicine.
​
The 2025 Integrative and Korean Medicine Training Program consists of four core modules:
Foundations of Integrative and Korean Medicine, Evidence-Based Korean Medicine and Research, Clinical Approaches of Korean Medicine, ,and Ultrasound-Guided Acupuncture/Pharmacopuncture.
All lectures are developed and delivered by leading experts in each field, based on the most up-to-date evidence, clinical knowledge, and research.
Lecture Overview – This lecture is structured around the following key learning objectives:
1. Understand the historical development and foundational concepts of Traditional Korean Medicine (TKM) and how it diverged from Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM).
2. Identify and analyze key philosophical and clinical differences between TKM and TCM.
3. Explore the significance of these differences in the future development and globalization of East Asian traditional medicine.

From Shared Roots to Divergent Identities

Professor Kim begins by tracing the shared history of TKM and TCM, emphasizing centuries of cultural exchange involving doctors, medical texts, and materia medica. While acknowledging this interconnectedness, the lecture stresses that the distinct sociocultural and geographical contexts of Korea have fostered the development of a uniquely Korean medical identity.

TKM’s evolution is presented through four foundational pillars: Hyangyak medicine (local herbal medicine), Donguibogam (Heo Jun’s seminal text), Sasang medicine (constitutional typology), and Saam acupuncture (principle-based acupuncture system). These elements are not only historical artifacts but active contributors to Korean medicine’s contemporary clinical philosophy.

Six Key Distinctions Between TKM and TCM

Central to the lecture is a clear, structured presentation of six core differences between TKM and TCM:

1. Person-Centered vs. Disease-Centered: TKM prioritizes individual constitution, whereas TCM emphasizes disease pattern.

2. Constitution vs. Symptoms: Sasang medicine focuses on treating by constitution type; TCM relies more on symptom-based pattern identification.

3. Internal Injuries vs. External Factors: TKM gives weight to internal causes such as emotional or dietary factors; TCM often centers on external pathogenic influences.

4. Prevention vs. Treatment: Preventive care is emphasized in TKM through practices like Yangsaeng; TCM traditionally focuses on addressing illness.

5. Principles vs. Experience in Acupuncture: TKM acupuncture systems (e.g., Saam, Eight Constitution) are built on theoretical frameworks, while TCM emphasizes empirically derived techniques.

6. Form and Temperament vs. Dialectical Patterns: TKM uses physical and emotional constitution as diagnostic criteria; TCM employs structured dialectical frameworks (e.g., Six Channels, Four Levels).

These distinctions are not positioned in opposition but rather as complementary pathways that reflect the adaptability and depth of each tradition.

Why This Lecture Matters

This lecture holds significant value for practitioners and scholars interested in the cultural and epistemological underpinnings of East Asian medicine. Rather than viewing TKM and TCM as interchangeable, Professor Kim advocates for a deeper understanding of their unique contributions. His perspective fosters dialogue not only between traditional and conventional medicine but also within the traditional medicine community itself.

Reframing East Asian Medicine in a Global Context

The session concludes by urging efforts to standardize terminology, collaborate in scientific research, and foster mutual development strategies. In doing so, it calls for the globalization of East Asian traditional medicine—not through homogenization, but through respectful recognition of diversity.

Looking to Deepen Your Understanding of Traditional Medicine?

This lecture is highly recommended for clinicians, researchers, and educators who wish to appreciate the nuanced differences between TKM and TCM. It offers a thoughtful foundation for integrating these insights into both academic discourse and practical application, especially as traditional medicine continues to evolve within a global healthcare landscape.

What to read next on Jaseng Medical Academy