Post #290,655
8/11/07 9:17:04 PM
8/11/07 9:24:45 PM
|
Leading edges and off the edge
I regard with some sympathy Ashton's broadminded (occasionally perhaps promiscuous) willingness to cast his intellectual net into oceans not typically sailed—or even recognized as "wet"—by our western rational traditions. On the other hand I am disposed to regard most beliefs covered by the rubric of "New Age" in general, and "crystal healing" in particular (one of many) as so much claptrap for all practical purposes (I define healthcare as a practical purpose). I have a dear friend who is mortally ill. The oncologist is fighting an uphill battle, and believes that there is a slender chance that some recent developments in chemotherapy may purchase a few more months of stability and comfort for her. The oncologist (call her "Dr. O") has arrived at this conclusion, I assume, on the basis of reviewing results from peer-reviewed studies. I note that Dr. O does not appear to be considering a trip to Mill Valley to select from the current generation of magical healing crystals the best specimens for banishing metastatic ovarian cancer.
The end may, indeed likely will be the same in this instance, although if Dr. O were to go to an exclusive regimen of crystals this evening I have no doubt that V would be gone by September. The difference is that the anti-cancer treatments in place today are presumably* administered after a rigorous course of research, testing, experimentation, analysis and review. And crystals? "Peer review" comes down to "my sister-in-law's best friend's mother." We're talking here something like the level of assertions that are routinely shot down at [link|http://www.snopes.com/|Snopes].
pwhysall's "how much of a cultural relativist are you at 30,000 feet" (presumably a tribute to Dick Dawkins' [link|http://www.amazon.com/River-Out-Eden-Darwinian-Science/dp/0465069908/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/105-4800466-3181247?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1186879662&sr=1-1|River Out of Eden], though he may have used the line elsewhere) puts it nicely. There may be more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in Horatio's philosophy, but the record of the past couple of thousand years strongly suggests that to the extent we desire Nature to yield reliable results we must approach her systematically. Intuition has certainly led to breakthroughs times past, but when have these ever been divorced from the less glamorous substrate of the scientific method?
Regarding the plastics controversy with which this thread began, I suspect that the convenience of the assorted polymers that have entered our environment (Bakelite, the first commercial plastic, is a century old this year) may ultimately be seen as poor reward for the havoc these rogue molecules have wrought on the collective and on our individual internal environments. I am, however, only an educated layman, and lack the credentials and training that permit an impartial scientist, or a bought-and-paid-for industry whore, to make a pronouncement on this issue.
ramblingly,
*It is certainly conceivable in this century's political environment that a cabal of particularly bloodthirsty HMO, Big Pharma and insurance executives are dictating the published clinical "results" with a mind to the next quarter's results, but this way madness lies...
Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist.
Edited by rcareaga
Aug. 11, 2007, 09:24:45 PM EDT
|
Post #290,657
8/11/07 9:42:17 PM
|
'to the extent we desire Nature to yield reliable results'
Actually this doesn't apply. Crystals are a tool of the healer, not of nature, just as a tarot deck is a tool of the reader and has in itself no magic.
Whether a healer or a tarot reader is effective is a very individual thing, some are, most aren't, and telling one from another is pretty much impenetrable to scientific study. Tell me scientifically why Picasso was a great artist and why 10,000 others weren't.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #290,660
8/11/07 9:52:57 PM
|
WHAT???
Emphases added: Whether a healer or a tarot reader is effective is a very individual thing, some are, most aren't, and telling one from another is pretty much impenetrable to scientific study. V's right pleural cavity was filling with fluid. Trained medical personnel put a drain in it, and relieved her discomfort. Are you suggesting that V might have skipped the doctors and gone to a tarot reader to determine her course of treatment from that point? This seems inconsistent with the impression I had formed of you. bewilderedly, Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist.
|
Post #290,664
8/11/07 10:08:36 PM
|
You go to whoever's appropriate to your problem.
Clearly advanced cancer isn't a problem appropriate to a tarot reader though some emotional issues very well might be - depends on the reader.
Your friend obviously has a problem appropriate, at least in large part, to invasive surgery and similar methods.
Whether a good healer (with crystals or other tools of choice) might be an adjunct to this treatment is the open question - possibly for comfort but almost certainly not for cure at this stage.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #290,666
8/11/07 10:20:24 PM
|
OK, sure
Clogged toilet, I consult plumber.
Dodgy wiring, I consult electrician.
Cancer, I hie me to the oncologist.
—tell me again, for what do I consult the palmist, the tarot-card reader, the Wiccan crystal goddess, the phrenologist? And how do I quantify the likely expertise of these worthies as against the, ah, mature technologies represented by the first three enumerated professions?
mystified,
Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist.
|
Post #290,670
8/11/07 11:16:09 PM
|
Well, say you had some emotional issues or. . .
. . your life seemed without direction. Would you go to a psychiatrist and expect "scientifically verified" results? From the results I've seen you won't do any worse with your local witch doctor, and it'll cost you a hell of a lot less - and if s/he's good it just might help.
For a chronic health issue where the doctors simply say "there's nothing wrong with you" or go wandering off on some currently popular but inappropriate tangent as they often do, a healer is probably a better choice - at the least less damage will be done.
Here again, effectiveness is an entirely personal thing, a relationship between the practitioner and the client. It's up to the client to judge if that relationship is effective.
Practitioners that try to be "scientific" are generally ineffective. Back around 1970, Paula, a former girlfriend, was taking singing lessons from a well known teacher, a Dr. Long, who was also president of the American Astrological Society.
The AAS was trying to get a law passed in California to certify and license astrologers. Certification was, of course, to be according to the "scientific" astrological principles of the AAS.
Paula was sent out on spying missions to various astrologers to have readings done and report back as to their compliance or non-compliance. She told me that what really struck her was that the really good ones paid no heed to "scientific" principles at all, but used the tools in their own personal way, and each in a different way. Those that followed the formal rules were all hacks.
Phrenology is a pseudo-science and unlikely to be effective in any way - but the Wiccan crystal goddess might be effective, and at least will be a lot more fun, and that could help right there.
A funny: - Years ago I was at a party talking to a schoolteacher. She told me that the year before she'd been at some sort of teacher's retreat. A card reader had set up camp there and did readings between scheduled events.
She told me that several teachers had readings done and were urging her to have one, "It's fun!". She told them it was senseless and irrational and she wouldn't do it.
Finally succumbing to peer pressure she sat down for a reading. The guy spread the cards and looked at them for a bit, then looked her in the eye and said, "First of all, you've got to stop messing around with the guys at work".
She told me, "That hit so hard I didn't hear another word he said".
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #290,699
8/12/07 7:49:16 AM
|
As to Astrologers, Homeo - swan song, for here (new thread)
Created as new thread #290698 titled [link|/forums/render/content/show?contentid=290698|As to Astrologers, Homeo - swan song, for here]
|
Post #290,712
8/12/07 12:41:37 PM
|
Western medicine. (new thread)
Created as new thread #290711 titled [link|/forums/render/content/show?contentid=290711|Western medicine.]
|
Post #290,717
8/12/07 1:10:54 PM
|
Blood thirsty HMOs (new thread)
Created as new thread #290716 titled [link|/forums/render/content/show?contentid=290716|Blood thirsty HMOs]
|
