(This drill has occurred before, and I'm just not going to go back and cut/paste. If I contradict myself.. very well, I too contain legions.) I'll try to provide the more significant l experiences that form my attitude re non-standard approaches; I don't care if these are compelling - it's possible that my intelligence is wanting. Hell, maybe curl grad V !=0 either. I never derived it.

First: nobody despises a charlatan more than I - it is so easy to fool the credulous that, you know you are dealing with someone who could not even get into remedial Business class. You are dealing with an opportunist - and one with 0 empathy for the (possibly ruinous) results of cynical manipulation. (I have a similar aversion to orthodoxies which the holder has never thought to test = including myself, when I lazily go along. 'Best burn treatments' this year, anyone?)

Astrology:
An Indian personage of great moment, alive today
(peddles no 'religion', has many Murican 'students' + from most other countries, in the 100s of Ks who actually make it there, last I checked)
observed when asked, "is there anything to astrology?"

"Astrology good science. [Today] no good Astrologers."
(He can be quite more terse than a Perl script - though usually suiting his answers to the being?/style of the questioner, in several languages. This one was apparently seeking a definitive, brief summary, not a dissertation with ~how/whys.)

I too once maintained the Good Scientist mandated POV re 'astrology'; (it is a catechism amongst all who ever received only a technical education and faked the humanities - with extreme prejudice.) That is I did, until -

A) I encountered One of these "rare Good" Ones, all accidentally, peripheral to reasons of our acquaintance. Specifically, one Bennett T. - mentioned before in these pages (since the style of dealing with these pointless Black/White Right/Wrong dualities Is the bon ton of daily gossip everywhere.) He with degrees in math plus an LLd (I suppose) because he passed the Bar in Illinois. Then found he could not bear to 'do law', had other interests, and apparently Talents as well.

B) I considered.. then agreed-with-self that it is perfectly permissible to dismiss the rubric by which mental connections are made, by those who demonstrate an aptitude for getting to the roots of problems presented to them. ie Performance counts most (just as, a person may employ logic correctly, never having heard of - or at least needed to formally create - 'a truth table'.)

It appears that very many human 'personality' traits can be mapped-to the (only seemingly irrelevant) model of the universe -- a model which thus, all-unfathomably, seeks to correlate some birth-time/location with: this cornucopia of human jelloware, so 'very-differently wired' within any individual person.

(Andrew: When you mention the uselessness of the 'by-rote' interpretations, I believe I can say that Bennett would agree, exactly. Certainly can say re. any prediction nonsense = see below.) He expired way too-early, via too-late treated diabetes.. well before that became one of the US's most popular escalating maladies. His widow filled in lots more material about his unusual life.. He had never mentioned to me his math degree! Causing me to blush retroactively re unnecessarily dumbed-down answers about "electronics". {sigh}

Similarly the Tarot, other potentially-silly means that may assist a clever mind to deal with abstractions, to some named purpose (whether or not I might be able to connect their method with its results - from my different and limited experience.) These are all about the creation of a mental state which permits some form of empathy? with the person at-hand. That it is an invitation to charlatanism? Tell me about Murican bizness. People will Sell anything saleable, especially those with a stunted, say being.

That is, One More Time:
IMO the artifices are no more important than.. whether an artisan drills a hole with a hand-drill or an electric one: is the hole drilled properly / precise enough for intended use?

Shrinks (who are not Scientists, either) attempt to do the very same thing that a 'Good' Astrologer attempts -- or the Oracle at Delphi? And as all know (who have ever dealt direct or been close to those who have done so) -- the ability to deliver Useful insights to people in Language they can Work With -- is by no means guaranteed by the therapist's acquisition of an academic degree. (I know some bi-polar folk - look up the plethora of 'theories + pharm-chem' for That. Changes weekly.)

It's different in Real Science of course. One could ~paraphrase AE at this point, "to the extent that a study concerns human activities, its chances of achieving success via only rote application of scientific axia -- diminishes." I think you cannot do the best medicine without successful human interaction - and it is That which is spoken-about most!- when people offer p\ufffdns to recently deceased 'great doctors'. The other mechanical skills are taken for granted (alas, even when those were somewhat deficient.)

As to 'defending' (or even trying to decribe the Methods of) a so-called "good Astrologer" - especially to the person who requires a neatly-progressive logical syllogism, before imagining that some concept could possibly possess validity re human experience:
I say the necessarily redundant Hah! Go read Hamlet's quip to Horatio; dismiss at some risk to old-age credibility, when you look back at other youthful Certainties picked up by osmosis.

Logic presents a comforting illusion of Certainty (since it works so well in equations.) But even allopathic medicine relies upon insight, discernment, interpretation of oft conflicting syndromes, etc. Except-almost re trauma! (yet even there, the degree of injury affects nice-decisions on whether or not the anaesthesia will become a tipping point For That Person? if there's previous direct experience / whether the burn area will overwhelm? and similar.)

If I could describe How Bennett achieved his insights (attested by many subsequent joint acquaintances, not merely my own amazement) - why then, I could write a manual to crank out ez-clones, now couldn't I? Next: DaVinci. I could say some things about his interactions, but too lengthy. Conclusion: few shrinks attain the 'success rate' he achieved. He made no 'predictions' [that was on his card!] - he only treated personal 'problems', knew the jargon of astrology -- mentioning aspects of that reluctantly, only when queried. No touchy-feely there to snicker at.


Homeopathy:
I've read about Hahnemann, and I can do Avogadro's Number and ratios, with anyone.
On the one hand, he begins with more credibility (to me) than any physician of his day, as he was trained as a physicist; I consider that the history of allopathic medicine is filled with an excess of arrogant mediocre minds, ego-driven and most-often poorly trained in the basic disciplines of science. Today students are trained, as then, by-rote and at absurd rates of force-fed Factoids. There is little room in the PDR (Physicians Desk Ref.) for original discovery - especially given legal responses to bad effects of deviation. There is, simply No Time available in this manic course - for contemplation, experiment - rebuttal to 'current practices' (even after degree acquisition.) People who memorize very well are best candidates for 'passing' - I aver that this is Not a characteristic of the Original mind. (Bethe and other physicists could, however - do elaborate calculations in-head/no-paper - clearly having created Registers! wherein partial-results simply Must have been stored. Go figure - but, You Can't.)

As to Hahnemann and Avogadro; see [link|http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/alabaster/A954740| this] randomly found link which discusses some of his inspirations (Paracelsus), mentors and: here opines -

While Hahnemann had probably never heard of Avogadro's number (which was only determined half a century after Hahnemann published Organon der Rationellen Heilkunde in 1810) he surely must have realised that his dilutions were stretching even the limits of utter impossibility. However, Hahnemann had his own explanation for the skeptic using his potentization-dynamization theory. The vigorous shaking or pulverizing of a substance in between dilutions, he claimed, caused the substance to leave behind a 'spirit-like' essence which, although 'no longer perceptible to the senses', was nevertheless 'remembered' by the water, and thus retained healing properties.

I remain skeptical, as. I. stated. Clearly early-on. I also have observed the cats (also mentioned early-on) - with "terminal HIV" - now ~ 13+ years after their scheduled demise. (One of the three did die a few years back. A really Neat cat named Hamlet. He would wait patiently at feet.. for 'permission' to jump into your lap. Yeah: awww. RIP, Hamlet.)

Whether the 'remedies' have accounted for their survival or (perhaps?) the fact that they are fed healthier food than most Muricans eat, is a larger factor -- who knows. One thing is certain: a 'placebo effect' in CATS? I remain skeptical, yes - but I do not confuse that with certainty of the negative. All 'cures' are 'anecdotal' - it is only in stat. signif. Numbers that they become comparable. The AMA is a Trade Union and has its reasons for applying the quack-word to any experimentalist. Similarly: AMA deems a 'cure' = s/he lived another 5 years (possibly in daily agony relieved only by pharm-chem.) Others define 'cure' as: restoration to 'robust Health'. Take your pick about 'meanings'.

Finally, as to means of imagining how some of these odd approaches might.. have any conceivable validity [and perhaps - only for certain genetic configurations ?? who knows] I would remind those who imagine that modern allopathy is done "scientifically", to recognize the almost-trivial accumuated 'K'nowledge thus far, of human physiology, particularly the shallow comprehension of the operations of the crucial immune system -- apparent source of all genuine 'Cures' to maladies.

Then too, "the treatment of symptoms" == precisely what allo. Means: is not tantamount to 'cure'.
Nor is the brain/body (let alone the much more complex idea of mind/body) relationship beyond its infancy in comprehension. There has never been more brilliant trauma care than today; saw off a limb playing Mr. Fixit and odds are - it can be glued back. No nostrum is going to attach a limb: D'UH.

But the 'disease' model for symptom treatment -- remains an arguable and most-certainly not final approach to the idea of maintaining actual Health in bipeds. I have many more reservations about '00 medicine which derive from my experience, professionally - including re heavy-ion beam irradiation. (Among this group of MDS) their science was poor, as was their comprehension of the Whys /Hows of this extremely controllable means of applying radiation, only to an exact volume with mm precision. I saw them as technicians, still thinking rote thoughts, utterly uncomfortable with new Possibilities. Pathetic, really..

YMMV. I have no aim to mess with anyone's faith in the way they handle body/mind problems.
I've seen enough of the exceptional, watched enough hospital procedures etc. to operate under different presumptions than do most people. The fact that silly people have always flocked to the possibly-New, completely discrimination-free: says Nothing about the next discoveries, for which there is Much room, I aver.

Many of these seek alternatives because they are intelligent - have observed Too-closely: some trauma involving a family member, done research - and decided they have no choice but to investigate other possibilities. Others just - like to join flocks? I've spoken with a few of the 'cured' and seen the tests; one's prognosis was that of the cats: "x Months." Have also sat with an SO while dying-early - for an unnecessary 'exploratory' operation which promoted metastasis (done in a 'Model' local hospital.) And argued for more pain meds. Successfully - nurses are eversomuch more sensible than rote-MDs, typically.

Reiterate - I Don't Care how anyone else chooses to handle their medical matters - but spare me the sophomoric / patronizing lessons on 'gullibility' and "how obvious it is that modern medicine is perfected" in its knowledge of the workings of our meta-machines. We are a few steps from the caves, in so much that passes for '00 'civilization'. That's my story and I'm sticking with it until I see - something Different happen.


Ashton