Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

permaculture - Re: natures diversity (was: Re: Pc slammed in Whole Earth Review

permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: permaculture

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Allan Balliett <igg@igg.com>
  • To: "permaculture" <permaculture@franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: natures diversity (was: Re: Pc slammed in Whole Earth Review
  • Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 12:46:57 -0500


If homeopathy has a real effect in a group of people, than this must be
measurable. If studies showing this have been made and their methodology is
all right, O.K.

This reminds me: I've also seen planting by the moon disproven by science.

If things are true only if science has not disproven them, what good is observation? Can we only work with the world through the eyes of peer reviewed studies?

Both planting by the moon and homeopathy could only be "proven" by practitioners, because the nuances are understandably missed by the university people. (for example: in 'real' homeopathy, there are only remedies for individual conditions, not individual symptoms. Given this, I would think that it would be completely impossible to set up a scientific 'proof' of homeopathy. Not paying attention to this fact (in fact, minunderstanding the very basis of homeopathy) and administering homeopathic remedies as though one dose fits all is a sure way to 'disprove' homeopathy (while what you've really proven is that skipping the case taking state of a homepathic diagnosis is likely to end in failure.)

The bottom line is: only the mainstream culture has the funds to create formal testing scenarios. These funds are only likely to come from places that have a motivation for proving or disproving what they can through the study. As mentioned earlier: who wants to spend money to 'prove' homeopathy? Why prove planting by the moon when, if it is true, could call into question criticisms of traditional agricultures.
-Allan





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page