the point is that anti-vaccine positions are heterodox, not trendy. Theres definitely a trend of people learning that vaccines are clandestine biochemical warfare agents, especially since they are trying to give people more and more vaccines, earlier and earlier in childhood/infancy, which contradicts what a lot of these people were taught in medical school, and the public is catching on. But if youre suggesting that it is somehow fashionable to oppose vaccines, well thats good news to me hahaha
That’s a news paper article. And A politically charged one at that. I’d bet a nickle if the parties were reversed it would be “anti-science” backwards Republicans condemn “the good” Obama’s vaccination policy.
Anyway here is an open acces journal you may find interesting:
http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1000114
But I still keep straying from my point - I knew this would go off topic into “meta” discussions tout suite, and I’m to blame.
- I am 99% sure a “science fact war” will do no good in this thread., or hardly ever in life So I’m done with that - not my point or concern here
The point is motivation and accountability
What is the motivation of people born into our “traditional” medical system to easily accept hack “medicine” so quickly, what is the accountability ofsuch schools of thought ,and why does one dismiss “traditional” medicine with such ease?
Furthermore why the hell would intellectuals (such as lrc) who have no real authority in"medicine" have the gall to promote and politicize such a thing? And where the hell is their accountability for it?
Theres definitely a trend of people learning that vaccines are clandestine biochemical warfare agents
I’m curious about the motives the conspirators are supposed to have? This seems to make about as much sense as supposing that heavy metal bands have backward messages in their music encouraging their fanbases to kill themselves.
I think you are creating a false dichotomy when you say we must reject one half of the world’s esoteric knowledge for the other half’s. I also wonder how you can reject so many cultures out of hand. Surely youre not so well-studied that you can make this reccomendation from your own knowledge. Are you?
i was being sarcastic there
furthermore I would suggest that the mysticism is equal parts secrecy (on the part of the mystic), unfamiliar (to the westerner) vocabulary, and laziness/arrogance (on the part of the westerner). If the science is there, then how do you justify rejecting their doctrine and substituting your own? I suppose I could just take all the data we have and come up with my own equally valid theory and simply reject the atomic theory of chemistry
by this i was talking about some techneges
a mystic and secular person can both practice the technege, they will both find results, but one blames it on the mysticim and the other has explanations that don’t involve mysticim. sort of like the paranormal or mystic vs neuroscience stuff. other examples can be one says it worked because of a mysical power, and the other the laws of physics and the natural world.
Is this a joke? Have you read Tao Te Ching?
Look at the cultural loyalty that the West and East have historically produced. The West (Judeo-Christian) threw all of the Hermetic, pagan, Eastern mysticism away (well they’ve always kept paganism around as if they fear it).
vive, haven’t I seen you post that you are some kind of nihilist? How can you justify ‘belief’ in anything at all? This question would be a “If p then why would anyone…” Where does epistemology become important for the nihilist?
Chi refers to the portion of the universal aether that animates you…It is sort of like “soul” in English, but it is used because that is the word in the East (not because the leisure class need to sound pretentious). Upon reflection, “meditation,” (which basketball is NOT) supposedly there is some level of conscious state where you can have more influence over ‘your section of the aether’ (Chi). By the way, basketball and fishing and things have material ends that occupy your mind. Meditation is more akin to thinking and doing nothing else. This isn’t mysticism either. Check out electro magnetic brainwave scans. Theta is what you are looking for. Not Alpha. Not beta. Not Delta.
LRC I cannot speak for, but I suppose I would say that I am a naturalist anarchist which is why Austrtian economics and Graeco-Egyptian Hermeticism work so well together. The concepts that the mind cannot be accounted for in a scientific way, that purposeful action results in a variety of process that allow for a coherent “organic market economy,” and that mathematics (theological) can be deduced , are what set up for the concept that all in the universe is ordered similarly. The body, circulatory, nervous, etc. systems are no different than a nebula forming, a flower growing, or a market forming.
Natural medicine (or a healthy premedative diet) seems logical. Reishi or Maitake mushroom tea is not "Eastern mystic healing’. It is simply based around having diets that replenish all nutrients that your body uses. Now, just like with Tarot, lawyers, and spouces, there are shysters and there are Jung’s.
I’ll bet anything that a daily dose of Reishi is better than the drugs that you can get from a modern hospital. The trick is, you have to actually stick to the diet. You cannot eat processed everything then take medicine from Baxter and Pfizer and get your fat sucked out with a hose… The point of homeostasis is to say that your body has a regulatory system that you can help along by putting in the right “energies” and the right “nutrients” in it.
0_o
I’d say that people use methods that are backed by language they can understand. When they understand and emotionally are behind their treatment, they behave in many unconscious ways that support the success of the treatment. I think this is true of any type of treatment, conventional Western or otherwise.
In other words, ANY thing works best if you believe that it will. Perhaps it’s easier to accept something mystical because the language of mysticism doesn’t change as rapidly as the language of science, and tradition/history imply reliability to most people.
vive, haven’t I seen you post that you are some kind of nihilist? How can you justify ‘belief’ in anything at all? This question would be a “If p then why would anyone…” Where does epistemology become important for the nihilist?
This is off topic. I’ll just give a quick sketch, and that’s all. I am not a nihilist if you mean skeptic. I am anti-skepticism (to use the term loosely). I am an ontological materialist, a Stirnerite and Nietzschean and probably a quasi-Aristotlian.
I could be seen as a moral nihilist, but not a cosmological one (which is nonsense to me).
As far as “belief”, I do call medicine a practice, just like law, and I actually do have very real complaints with the industry - they are just not on the same page as any “mystic” medicine which I radically hate. I certainly have no qualms when I vaccinate people.
However due to my conservative side -I am questioning why people jump ship when they have what I see as little reason to do so, with little effort put in the field.
Natural medicine (or a healthy premedative diet) seems logical.
I think I specified I was not going after this. It’s very broad, but I have seen few cases if any, certainly none that were “popular” that caused catastrophically stupid decision making. Diet and lifestyle choices are not my concern. People who call themselves “healers” and make interventions during an illness are.
I am not defending “modern medicine”, I am attacking it’s alternative that actively tries to undermine it in a universal way (nor am I particularly irked by actual factual traditional “folk remedies” ingrained in various cultures as a whole).
Furthermore I am calling most people who attack “modern medicine” superficial, ideological, unaccountable, skeptical (in a bad way), rabble rousers who are probably far more dangerous than helpful.
there are shysters and there are Jung’s
Even Jung got co-opted by New Agers and got put on the back burner of being taken seriously, which is something he did not want to happen.
A cute little article I had cut out from last year:
And with wonderfully stupid names like Oscillococcinum, and white dudes in pony tails and robes who call themselves “healers” (something not even the douchiest doctor would call himself) one would think it was a funny joke. But there are casualties to subversive BS.
This is exactly how I feel about critics of modern psychiatry (I suppose this is part of medicine). I am no fan of the practice itself, but some of the main criticims I see of it originate with people who peddeled Scientology in their lifetime. The alternatives being proposed must be judged on a case by case basis. We cannot lump all critics together into the snake oil category.
A friend of mine a tU Chicago is going for his PHD in Bioethics (or something similar) - and is doing work on something along the lines of perverse incentives and the psychotropic drug industry. Supposedly Northwestern is doing good work with that as well (?). I don’t know how much that dovetails into psychiatry though. I know very little of psychiatry. I do know psychiatrists go through med school though - they aren’t chiroprators or anything
As for meditation, maybe it’s the same thing as hypnosis, when an athelete “focuses”, or when an OCD person is doing their OCD. I really don’t know, nor do I ever really concern myself with meditation/contemplation. But I’m done talking about that, I only used it for an example. It was meant to be taken as a widget.
I think it is difficult to define meditation, but it is not exactly like ‘meditation’ in the Cartesian sense or the trendy transcendental meditation. It is not really ‘focus’ either, but probably the opposite of that. It is state of monitoring the processes of the mind that focuses, as a means of watching it and recognize that it works automatically. And also to cease identifying with all of the many voices and see things and the ego objectively and wholy. It is an attempt to separate conditioning from the self, which is a means of intelligent action instead of conditioned action.
However, it seems to be something that ‘mystics’ have right. Yoga itself was meant as an exact science in ancient India. If it is followed correctly, I think it is good.
Different types of meditation have different objectives, but what you describe is a type of mindfulness exercise.
the editorial slant is more or less irrelevant, the existence of a secret vaccine court that has affirmed the link between vaccines and illness thousands of individual times is the salient point.
its cool, but your point seems to be “why do people believe in stuff that is prima facie ridiculous” and my rejoinder would be that its not so ridiculous when you actually examine the facts. But this applies to your examples more than your point because we can agree that there is ridiculous stuff out there.
my contention is that it isnt easy at all, and adherents of heterodox positions in medicine and science have to paddle upstream to even be taken seriously, whereas mainstream science and medicine gets a free pass simply because they provide intellectual cover for political elites. A lot of people turn to holistic medicine because the traditional medical system told them flat out that they didnt have an answer to whatever problem the individual experiences. Its easy to say “oh they just arent epistemologically rigorous” but its probably more correct to say they are operating from different premises than you.
probably because authorities in medicine dont tolerate dissenting opinions outside a very narrow range of acceptable dissent, and some people would like to be exposed to those dissenting opinions. I’m not sure what you mean by accountability, are you suggesting that lrc is somehow responsible for whatever it is an individual chooses to do with information they got from an article published on lrc?
Doctors make money from sick people, right? Thats a reasonable motive. If you want to go a bit further afield, you could listen to bill gates explain that vaccines are important for population control.
nevertheless, I dont think its bad for me to say “I dont know what motivates these people” we can still look at the facts and evaluate them rationally and conclude that vaccines are ineffective at preventing disease and have all sorts of harmful side effects, to include mental illness and death.
I agree with Malachi that the OP came pretty close to suggesting that noone has the right to peddle snake oil.
Let’s not forget that snake oil sells, as the OP says, and that’s an explanation all to itself. There’s a real market demand for products and services that frame their claims in certain ways. So the creators of a homeopathic drug are aware of their market. They aren’t doing anyone any harm. If one of their customers chooses to take sugar pills without researching their other options, and then dies of their illness, well…too bad for them. More often, they either see no change in their symptoms and go to another modality, or they get better. Then they tell their friends the treatment worked. The user doesn’t know and doesn’t care what REALLY made them well.
People are often stupid. Isn’t that enough? Their money’s green.
Now, a lot of the modalities that are being discussed here have objectives quite different from the objectives of modern Western medicines, which tend to be simply “treat condition A with product B”. Most meditation styles worldwide are religious techniques, not medical ones per se. Some of the purely practical side benefits to meditation have medical implications, such as pain management. This is often the only way such techniques become interesting to Westerners. Whether such a benefit stems from more mindful self-control, or from actual chemical changes in the body that result in less pain, hardly matters to the Westerner who practices it solely for that purpose. From a few success stories spawns a whole slew of claims in Western literature, and then you get some of the weird hybrid practices we see here.
A thing Westerners know about non-western treatments is they are often based on holistic approaches. This has some goofy usages today, but basically we know that a Chinese herbal drug, for example, is intended to treat the “root cause” as well as the entire organism as one entire inseparable thing. This is no more likely to be effective than any other viewpoint, but it SOUNDS like it should be. At least, it sounds less likely to do unintentional harm. We all read the side effects listed on our prescription bottles and like to think that there could be a more beneficial way to go about it.
Add to the above a little history. In the Middle Ages, it was the Islamic world that maintained the best medical facilities and sold the most effective drugs. Look at the pepper trade, for example. The stuff just CAME from the East, and always had. This probably sets the groundwork for the Western belief that Eastern anything is likely to work better. Then much later, the Romantic era began this fascination with the Non-Western in general. Many modern medicines come from botanical research conducted in China and elsewhere during this time.
are you suggesting that lrc is somehow responsible for whatever it is an individual chooses to do with information they got from an article published on lrc?
Nope. I am suggest they are being slippery and subversive, and are operating and supporting crankery and crackpots.
Yes cranks and crackpots are “free to do as they will” yes money talks, yes this is all fashionablism - in that sense it’s “correct” with whatever goes on.
However I think there are more interesting ways to approach this. A drug company has to list a bajillion side effects, suffer massive lawsuites, and go through a pretty clear language in order to explain what is going on - in order to cover their own ass. A homeopathic healer, not really. Furthermore intellectuals who have dubious merit in the area of medicine are promoting one form of crackpot treatment at the expense of medicine are being flat out subversive and misleading.
I just think it’s funny everytime someone brings up the “mystic east” to a form of criticism, it’s about as polite as shitting on the dinner table. Governments do subsidize this crap by the way, so it isn’t “pure”:
Romantic era began this fascination with the Non-Western in general.
Sure, but instead of Rousseau just running around half naked in a jungle somewhere - intellectuals, critics, and gerneral haterade drinkers have to insist we all do it and somehow what they are saying is valid. There are languages set up to call them out on their BS, however they continually duck, bob and weave out of it.
Due to intellectual class Romantic gibberish and haterade, we are stuck in a culture of Protestant busy-bodieness and moralism married with a Procrustean bed like Brahmain universalism. Shitty.
All I can say in response is that if you don’t want a thing, don’t buy or practice it. But since from another post I know you’ve done very little research into at least two specific Asian philosophic traditions which you nevertheless bash as bunk, I can’t approve of the broad brush with which you’re painting half the world.