Paul Unschuld's unanswerable question - HORMESIS

[Guest guest]

> Sammy wrote:> Science is a template for acquiring certainty in

knowledge.

>

> Sammy,

>

> As a Western scientist, I would rephrase your comment. I would say

that Western science is a template for asking certain questions about

things that we observe. The results may tempt one to claim certainty

in the realm of knowledge. I personally would resist the temptation.

>

> Emmanuel Segmen

 

There are a number of books that discuss the nature, including the

limitations, of science in detail. A classic work is Thomas Kuhn's

'The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.' Of course, there's Fritjof

Capra's 'The Turning Point', and in the medical sphere, Andrew Weil's

'Spontaneous Healing' and 'Health and Healing'.

 

It would take an incredibly long time to summarize various points just

these authors make, but one overall generalisation is that when

matters are considered in detail, the conventional scientific approach

is extremely limited in scope, and in many respects, very problematic.

Kuhn's concept of Normal Science is, in my opinion, very important for

people such as CM practitioners to understand.

 

Wainwright

[Guest guest]

Wainwright,

 

I brought up almost this precise point regarding Kuhn's perspective and quite a

karate chop from various corners of CHA. It was both fun and amusing how much

certain members of the list hold dear the American belief that Western science

will save the day. Perhaps your reference of Kuhn's term Normal Science, and

it's inherent limitations will evoke a less intense response. Perhaps you will

have the pleasure of seeing how interesting it is to strike a weak and tender

spot in the American psyche. If so, it will also answer some of Jim Ramholz's

question as to how dear do American's hold the sanctity of Western science. I'm

finding that a lot of licensed acupunturists are what my friend Gabrielle

Matthiew calls " biomedical jrs " . A very endearing epithet for someone who

embraces the tenets of Western science while practicing the arts of CM ...

mainly as applied to Western science disease states. At least that's the

impression I obtained.

 

Emmanuel Segmen

 

-

wainwrightchurchill

Sunday, October 19, 2003 11:43 PM

Paul Unschuld's unanswerable question - HORMESIS

 

 

> Sammy wrote:> Science is a template for acquiring certainty in

knowledge.

>

> Sammy,

>

> As a Western scientist, I would rephrase your comment. I would say that

Western science is a template for asking certain questions about things that we

observe. The results may tempt one to claim certainty in the realm of

knowledge. I personally would resist the temptation.

>

> Emmanuel Segmen

 

There are a number of books that discuss the nature, including the

limitations, of science in detail. A classic work is Thomas Kuhn's 'The

Structure of Scientific Revolutions.' Of course, there's Fritjof Capra's 'The

Turning Point', and in the medical sphere, Andrew Weil's 'Spontaneous Healing'

and 'Health and Healing'.

 

It would take an incredibly long time to summarize various points just these

authors make, but one overall generalisation is that when matters are considered

in detail, the conventional scientific approach is extremely limited in scope,

and in many respects, very problematic. Kuhn's concept of Normal Science is, in

my opinion, very important for people such as CM practitioners to understand.

 

Wainwright