The pursuit of knowledge and truth, through God, through science, through civil and engaging debate

Goto page Previous  1, 2

Reply to topic
Cinderella Man
First Post
PostPosted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 12:59 pm  Philosophy of Science Reply with quote

On other forums I have discussed in great length the foundations of the scientific method and run up against some people who feel strongly that the scientific method and science itself is an unproven entity, circular even in its efficacy. This generally describes the field of "Philosophy of Science". I continually challenge this as I find the argument itself circular and profoundly vacant of reasoning. When I confront people of this mindset with the realization that this "reasoning", if taken to its logical endpoint, means that we can literally no nothing with any degree of certainty, they insist this isn't the case and expound on their love and respect of science, which I find uncommonly hypocritical. Has anyone else here experienced this frustrating discussion? Thoughts?
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 11: Wed Feb 07, 2018 8:25 pm
Reply

Like this post
Cinderella Man wrote:

Of course this conversation has skewed toward the medical profession but this is hardly the limit of what I have been bellyaching about. The world of pseudo-science is vast.


I totally agree with you, and I don't support "pseudo-science". By the way I wouldn't consider any of the methods I use to be "pseudo-science".

There is no question in science that our brains control many functions of our bodies and that a brain that is in a depressed mental state (or an unfocused chaotic state) will indeed result in poor physical health as well. So since my methods focus on mental states, I think it would be wrong to call them "pseudo-science".

Mental health has been recognized by science to be a valid parameter in human health. In fact, I personally think that doctors themselves should focus more on mental health. They sometimes get too bogged down into trying to treat a physical body as if it has nothing to do with the brain that is ultimately controlling it.

So I could actually make valid scientific arguments for healthcare that includes mental therapy to a far greater degree than is currently employed by the healthcare industry.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 12: Thu Feb 08, 2018 6:22 pm
Reply

Like this post
[Replying to post 11 by Divine Insight]

I have personally benefited from therapy myself so I don't disagree that it should be utilized much more in helping people live well adjusted lives, which would probably have some health benefits and I tell almost everyone I know that whether they realize it or not they could probably benefit from it. There was a time when philological therapy was considered something terrible, that you must be a lunatic to need it. I think that's changed a lot and people consider it more of a valuable service to help people through even minor difficulties, but you and I may be ahead of the curve a bit. Our current health system certainly doesn't encourage the use of therapy even though it's much, much cheaper than dealing with stress, heart attacks and suicide.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Display posts from previous:   

Goto page Previous  1, 2

Jump to:  
Facebook
Tweet

 




On The Web | Ecodia | Facebook | Twitter

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.   Produced by Ecodia.

Igloo   |  Lo-Fi Version