View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

Homeopathy just doesn't work - It's a failure

Discussions about Holistic Health and Alternative Medicine.

Re: Homeopathy just doesn't work - It's a failure

Postby craig weiler » 23 Sep 2011, 07:48

Let me address consciousness a bit. It is impossible to completely educate anyone in this because there is just too much.

For starters, we do not directly interact with the world. This is a real limitation. We do not directly experience sight, touch or any of the other senses, but rather an interpretation of them. Our mind is the place where all the signals are given meaning. An apple is not an apple until a conscious brain decides it is. It has neither form nor taste nor does it make that nice crunchy sound. It is merely a bunch of molecules that are mostly empty space. Apple is what happens when our consciousness interprets the signals from the senses. We have no objective way of determining whether these signals are correct. This is a bit dense, but here's a link:
http://cns-alumni.bu.edu/~slehar/webstu ... chap1.html (paragraphs 2 thru 4)

Reality does not technically exist until it is observed:
http://www.integralscience.org/sacredsc ... antum.html

Nobel prize winner Eugene Wigner:
When the province of physical theory was extended to encompass microscopic phenomena, through the creation of quantum mechanics, the concept of consciousness came to the fore again; it was not possible to formulate the laws of quantum mechanics in a fully consistent way without reference to the consciousness . . . it will remain remarkable, in whatever way our future concepts may develop, that the very study of the external world led to the conclusion that the content of consciousness is the ultimate reality


In other words there is quite a bit of evidence that consciousness is fundamental to reality. This opens the door to stuff like homeopathy.
A ship in harbor is safe, but that's not what ships are for.
User avatar
craig weiler
 
Posts: 386
Joined: 03 Sep 2011, 12:08
Location: San Francisco Peninsula






Re: Homeopathy just doesn't work - It's a failure

Postby really? » 23 Sep 2011, 11:30

craig weiler wrote:really?
I didn't say that you were too stupid or close minded, but rather that you are uninformed about consciousness and therefore not in a position to judge homeopathy. I am much more informed about consciousness and therefore I withhold judgment about homeopathy because I have enough information to know that there are other ways that it could be explained.


Holy cow, if this isn't a non sequitur then I don't know what is
really?
 
Posts: 1009
Joined: 06 Mar 2010, 20:58

Re: Homeopathy just doesn't work - It's a failure

Postby Craig Browning » 23 Sep 2011, 21:17

really? wrote:
craig weiler wrote:really?
I didn't say that you were too stupid or close minded, but rather that you are uninformed about consciousness and therefore not in a position to judge homeopathy. I am much more informed about consciousness and therefore I withhold judgment about homeopathy because I have enough information to know that there are other ways that it could be explained.


Holy cow, if this isn't a non sequitur then I don't know what is


I'm guessing then, you do not know what one is. . .

Contempt prior to investigation is what hurts any and all folks calling themselves "skeptics" in this case -- I am referring to those that think anything contrary to their opinion on certain issues is bogus, not your average human that has skeptical views on things.

As I believe I've said previously, I don't have to "know" an individual to know where their processing comes from, after 30 years of bile issued towards me directly by persons calling themselves "skeptics" and/or "debunkers" I'd say I have a pretty good understanding as to what they do in any engagement where they are challenged or presented with alternative data. I know their attack processes and the constants of their ego -- I think they call it "Profiling" and interestingly, my discoveries on that front come quite close to what "official" sources hold on record when describing the same. . . though there's more of a supportive slant in specific areas tied to such. Bottom line is, I don't have to know an individual to know the nature of the beast.

I don't recall any specific name calling though I do use terms like hypocrite, double-talkers, and pseudo-intelligent with a degree of frequency. . . and as to my habit of being "vague" as you put it; I am guilty of using blanket statements just in the same manner most skeptics will do when it comes to things they refuse to actually investigate in the manner Craig has suggested. . . the way Skeptical Inquiry was done for decades. As best I can tell this "critical thought" angle is relatively recent by comparison, at least in the magic world, spurred on by a non-scientist with an axe to grind and career to save. . . so it's only been part of the attitude since the latter 60s, though I will recognize the fact that some of the reasoning behind this may be due to research done during the 40's & 50's (there's certainly reason to consider this).

What is proven here by Really & Arouet and perhaps another one or two when it comes to these things, is that Skeptics will turn the tables when they don't want to deal with the views shared by an individual, painting that person as being a nut-case or time waster, etc. Even in the case of Nobel Prize winners this has been the case, making them out as being "quack" scientists and not legit simply because of their views on Quantum Physics/Mechanics, etc. Again, it is part of the typical skeptic's pattern -- that map I mentioned earlier and how the general projection of most ardent skeptics, carries the arrogant air that they are of superior intellect, standing on the higher ground and "you" (the believer or supporter) is ignorant, not understanding the circumstance and as some have accused me, "On Drugs" that prevent us from knowing what we are seeing or experience for what it really was.

In my personal case (and probably to my peril) I both, will not play fetch and cannot organize my thoughts complete with references, etc. as most can do. I've found that many skeptics love finding this chink in people's "armor" so they can exploit it even further, compounding the idea that the defender of certain beliefs & views, isn't all there. I know this and know it first hand as well as through the testimony of others who've been bullied by the pseudo-intellects. In my case however, creating a response that is as tidy and specific as a few of you seem to demand (but avoid. . . as per Craig's posting on case studies above) would require more than a week of my time to pull together. I'm decent with on the spot quips but physically (medically) cannot deliver the type of retorts found during High School & College Debate competitions, so please stop making a big issue around something you already know I'm powerless over. I know that sounds weak on my part, but I do ask you to weigh the over-all picture which I've never kept all that concealed.

To my knowledge none of the three primary skeptics on this forum have taken up my challenge regarding the "Wisdom of the Mystic Masters" which more or less sustains what Craig has been pointing out and what I refer to when it comes to how today's self-ascribed skeptics simply assume things to be a certain way based on what they've read from biased publications or worse, on-line sources, and in a good number of cases, personal loathing of such things for whatever personal experience that has brought such about -- it's not just a Left vs. Right brain kind of thing, though such is a big factor.

In military school students are trained to study the tactics of past battles as well as the views and biographies of living generals, political leaders & despots so they know how they think; their strengths & weaknesses. Rommel & Patton for an example, gained tremendous admiration for one another by studying such things, some rumors suggesting that they had an unofficial face to face that included a literal game of chess. . . I stress, it's rumor no one has ever claimed to have witnessed this event. Then again, to confirm such happened would technically paint both men as traders to their own armies, wouldn't it? :twisted:

To my mind and apparently Craig W's this is something Skeptics fail to do; they refuse to learn about the other side of an issue and typically lean on the approved upon gospel passages this or that side of the ministry deem appropriate and valid. This is the point here and either it's too simple for the higher educated minds around here to grasp, or it's being side-stepped -- a dodge & parry which is the more standardized course of action when put on the spot.

I'm goading you into proving me wrong -- to break the mold and step off the typical trail followed by 90%+ of those calling themselves "skeptic" in our present time. Give me hope in the fact that you aren't the arrogant sods so many others have become, simply because they refuse to be actual skeptics vs. Cynics.
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

Re: Homeopathy just doesn't work - It's a failure

Postby Arouet » 24 Sep 2011, 00:39

Craig Browning wrote:What is proven here by Really & Arouet and perhaps another one or two when it comes to these things, is that Skeptics will turn the tables when they don't want to deal with the views shared by an individual, painting that person as being a nut-case or time waster, etc.


Please find a single post from me that demonstrates that when I don't want to deal with the views of another individual that I call them a nutcase or a time waster?

In my personal case (and probably to my peril) I both, will not play fetch and cannot organize my thoughts complete with references, etc. as most can do. I've found that many skeptics love finding this chink in people's "armor" so they can exploit it even further, compounding the idea that the defender of certain beliefs & views, isn't all there.


Seriously? Because we don't want to just take your word for it that what you say is true and ask you to back up your claims we are exploiting a chink in your armour? How do you come up with this stuff? Please tell me how it is unreasonable to ask you to back up your claims with evidence? What is unreasonable is making claims and then refusing to back it up.

I know this and know it first hand as well as through the testimony of others who've been bullied by the pseudo-intellects. In my case however, creating a response that is as tidy and specific as a few of you seem to demand (but avoid. . . as per Craig's posting on case studies above) would require more than a week of my time to pull together.


That's fair enough. We all have limited time. But making the request is not unreasonable. And if you feel that you can't back it up you should qualify your statements with that rather than speak declaratively. I've done that (put forward a position but admitted that I don't have the links at hand and don't have the inclination to spend the time looking it up.) We can then at least deal with the issue on that more provisional basis.

'm decent with on the spot quips but physically (medically) cannot deliver the type of retorts found during High School & College Debate competitions, so please stop making a big issue around something you already know I'm powerless over.


I didn't know your illness prevented you from finding links. But again: you should be more careful with your allegations - especially when it involves saying nasty things about people. It may not be fair to ask you to back it up, but its also not fair for you to ask us to accept what you're saying without such backup.

To my knowledge none of the three primary skeptics on this forum have taken up my challenge regarding the "Wisdom of the Mystic Masters" which more or less sustains what Craig has been pointing out and what I refer to when it comes to how today's self-ascribed skeptics simply assume things to be a certain way based on what they've read from biased publications or worse, on-line sources, and in a good number of cases, personal loathing of such things for whatever personal experience that has brought such about -- it's not just a Left vs. Right brain kind of thing, though such is a big factor.


Right, we all have limited time and inclinations. Until someone can say how we can reliably (not gut instinct) know that any of that stuff is accurate, I don't find it worth my time. I don't doubt that I might experience some cool stuff doing that. I might even convince myself that its something real. But why should I trust myself on that? No one has explained why we should trust that stuff. I prefer to stick with scientific studies/

I'm goading you into proving me wrong -- to break the mold and step off the typical trail followed by 90%+ of those calling themselves "skeptic" in our present time. Give me hope in the fact that you aren't the arrogant sods so many others have become, simply because they refuse to be actual skeptics vs. Cynics.


Again: fill me in on how to reliably approach that material and it may be worth it.
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Homeopathy just doesn't work - It's a failure

Postby craig weiler » 24 Sep 2011, 01:58

Again: fill me in on how to reliably approach that material and it may be worth it.


Simple. Learn about psi without referring to skeptic sources. Let the researchers and the psychics tell their side of things and just go with it and see where it leads you. Try to get a feel for the big picture.
A ship in harbor is safe, but that's not what ships are for.
User avatar
craig weiler
 
Posts: 386
Joined: 03 Sep 2011, 12:08
Location: San Francisco Peninsula

Re: Homeopathy just doesn't work - It's a failure

Postby Arouet » 24 Sep 2011, 02:29

I can't see how that is a reliable way to look into things. Especially when I'm not an expert myself. The scientific method is currently the most reliable method that we know of for determining what is real. It is far from perfect and no guarantee, but currently it gives us our best odds at figuring out what's going on.

However, the scientific method doesn't really apply to learning about the old masters and shamans etc. It doesn't help us analyse our experiences while we meditate (except from a physiological perspective). Or any of the other techniques that Craig B recommends. Just "going with it" may lead to cool experiences and I have no doubt that it will. But how do we then evaluate those experiences. I may feel like I "get it" but why should I trust those feelings. i can believe that Craig B and Craig W "get it" but why should I trust those conclusions? We need a manner of reliably analysing the experiences. otherwise they get relegated to "interesting" and that's about it.

For examples; several proponents have recommended to skeptics to take certain drugs and that they will then have insights and feel their place in the universe and the universal connection, etc. i don't doubt I might feel that too. But how do I trust my interpretation of that feeling?

I'm not being difficult here. I think its an important issue that often gets glossed over.
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Homeopathy just doesn't work - It's a failure

Postby ProfWag » 24 Sep 2011, 03:27

Arouet wrote:
Craig Browning wrote:What is proven here by Really & Arouet and perhaps another one or two when it comes to these things, is that Skeptics will turn the tables when they don't want to deal with the views shared by an individual, painting that person as being a nut-case or time waster, etc.


Please find a single post from me that demonstrates that when I don't want to deal with the views of another individual that I call them a nutcase or a time waster?

That goes for me as well Craig. I'm approaching 3,000 posts on here so if you believe that about me, surely you can find just one that began with me (I may have used a derogatory name from time to time, but I'm confident you would find they originated with another person directed towards me first...)
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Homeopathy just doesn't work - It's a failure

Postby ProfWag » 24 Sep 2011, 03:36

Craig Browning wrote:To my knowledge none of the three primary skeptics on this forum have taken up my challenge regarding the "Wisdom of the Mystic Masters" which more or less sustains what Craig has been pointing out and what I refer to when it comes to how today's self-ascribed skeptics simply assume things to be a certain way based on what they've read from biased publications or worse, on-line sources, and in a good number of cases, personal loathing of such things for whatever personal experience that has brought such about -- it's not just a Left vs. Right brain kind of thing, though such is a big factor.

Craig, I was unaware of this "challenge." If you posted it in the middle of one of your rather lengthy posts, I probably didn't even read it as I usually don't take the time if they are more than a couple paragraphs, but if you'd care to post it again in a more moderate post, I'll see what it's about. BTW, before you ask, I only read this one because it was either read your post or follow-up with a state senator I debated on Wednesday about unemployment benefits and, quite frankly, he bored me with his political answers so I thought he could wait a while and I'd just spend time being bored here... :-)
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Homeopathy just doesn't work - It's a failure

Postby ProfWag » 24 Sep 2011, 03:38

Craig Browning wrote:To my mind and apparently Craig W's this is something Skeptics fail to do; they refuse to learn about the other side of an issue ...

I don't refuse to do it, I just don't "play fetch." (Gee, wonder where I got THAT term! ;-) )
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Homeopathy just doesn't work - It's a failure

Postby ProfWag » 24 Sep 2011, 05:24

craig weiler wrote:Simple. Learn about psi without referring to skeptic sources. Let the researchers and the psychics tell their side of things and just go with it and see where it leads you. Try to get a feel for the big picture.


Okay. Here's a quote for you from a "non-skeptic" source concerning psi:
'Maybe it's possible, but it's weak and uninteresting." Dean Radin (http://www.deanradin.com/nytimes_hires_f.html)

Just sayin'... :-)
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Homeopathy just doesn't work - It's a failure

Postby Arouet » 24 Sep 2011, 05:36

Haha! I like that. Dean Radin: thinks psi is currently weak and uninteresting!
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Homeopathy just doesn't work - It's a failure

Postby craig weiler » 24 Sep 2011, 05:46

Arouet,
I can't see how that is a reliable way to look into things. Especially when I'm not an expert myself. The scientific method is currently the most reliable method that we know of for determining what is real. It is far from perfect and no guarantee, but currently it gives us our best odds at figuring out what's going on.


Well for one, you have not looked at enough psi data. You are hung up on ganzfeld arguments. But there are the staring studies, the RNG studies, the precog studies, the global consciousness project, the old zener cards, the afterlife experiments, the dogs that know when their owners are coming home, the telepathic parrot and a few others that escape my mind at the moment. All of these are psi experiments that have achieved positive results.

If you examine all of this piecemeal as a skeptic, you will remain in doubt. But if you set that aside for a moment and look at it from another angle, you can see the following pattern:
Experiment: Skepticism:
zener cards Must be a problem with the data or researcher
ganzfeld ditto
staring studies ditto
RNG studies ditto
retropsychokinesis studies ditto
precog studies ditto
remote viewing studies ditto
afterlife experiments ditto
dog studies ditto
parrot studies ditto
global consciousness project ditto
dice studies ditto
any other psi experiment no matter what: ditto

So here we have a situation where all evidence is rejected regardless of the experiment or the researcher. There is no situation where skeptics are meeting researchers half way or conceding anything. EVERYTHING has been rejected. Somehow, every one of these areas contains fatal flaws. If you are a skeptic, you might be willing to believe that this as it should be, but to any truly objective person, this pattern is batsh*t insane.

This is not a science problem, it is a psychological one.

But people holding a skeptical viewpoint won't see this. They will explain it away no matter how absurd the explanation. That's what makes skepticism unreliable.
A ship in harbor is safe, but that's not what ships are for.
User avatar
craig weiler
 
Posts: 386
Joined: 03 Sep 2011, 12:08
Location: San Francisco Peninsula

Re: Homeopathy just doesn't work - It's a failure

Postby craig weiler » 24 Sep 2011, 05:52

The bit with Dean Radin. You do know that the quote is from 15 years ago and pretty much taken out of context?
A ship in harbor is safe, but that's not what ships are for.
User avatar
craig weiler
 
Posts: 386
Joined: 03 Sep 2011, 12:08
Location: San Francisco Peninsula

Re: Homeopathy just doesn't work - It's a failure

Postby Arouet » 24 Sep 2011, 05:54

Why do you assume that I am not familiar with those studies? I've been around skeptiko for awhile now. We've talking about quite a bit, and I've read quite a bit.


craig weiler wrote:The bit with Dean Radin. You do know that the quote is from 15 years ago and pretty much taken out of context?



Yes, that's why it was funny!
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Homeopathy just doesn't work - It's a failure

Postby craig weiler » 24 Sep 2011, 06:08

And this does not strike you as odd that all of this science is automatically rejected regardless of the experiment or researcher?
A ship in harbor is safe, but that's not what ships are for.
User avatar
craig weiler
 
Posts: 386
Joined: 03 Sep 2011, 12:08
Location: San Francisco Peninsula

PreviousNext

Return to Holistic Health / Alternative Medicine

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest