by ABC2019 "25/10/20, 10:53
Janic wrote:
it is not a poll on a "definition" of homeopathy, on which it should be easy enough to get everyone to agree,
It has been 150 years that there was no acceptance by supporters of the A on the H. I doubt you will succeed!
I don't think the definition is too much of a problem, neither is that of astrology! it is on its more or less scientific character that there are problems, this is why I am doing the survey on it precisely.
Except that, once again, the patients are not treated by the more or less scientific, but by techniques which will prove to be effective or not because such a system or means which works in such an individual will prove ineffective for another. it is not specific to the pathology concerned (hence the absurdity of universal vaccines is everywhere)
and rebelotte! H would be classified among astrology or spiritualism rather than as a medicine in its own right since it is taught and practiced as such, by medical professionals. This is where your reasoning is biased from the start on this type of a priori; which cannot lead to anything positive and concrete.
but I did not say which of the propositions is correct! that said if you do a census of the different positions, it is undeniable that some people actually think that (including me and the 11 others who voted for a) probably).
Of course this is a point of view, a simple opinion; but based on highly publicized presuppositions (one wonders by whom…?) or else by personal experimentation, on lived experience? There is no indication that can be used as justification and in this case it is more than an opinion, it is a real belief without real foundation.
no one has denied that H is "taught and practiced as such, by medical professionals", we all agree with that. It just means that some think that
Everyone is free (for now) to think what they want. But again based on what?
this is not incompatible with the fact of being charlatanism (that is to say that there is of medical professionals capable of practicing and teaching quackery). You agree or disagree with that, but some definitely think so.
Of course there is, as with any system, the temptation of charlatanism,
including in the most official spheres. But it is a question of proportion. If this is tiny, it cannot and should not be taken for reference at all. However, assuming 1% (+ or -) of real charlatans in A as in H, this does not concern the rest of the professionals concerned. So, unless the people who responded to your solicitation have the medical skills or the practice to judge it; these responses, whether positive or not, have no scientific value.
So start by studying what H is through real specialists in this type of therapy in order to ask real, unbiased questions.
my questions are not biased precisely because they aim to summarize the different opinions, if everyone can express themselves, it is exactly the opposite of a bias! a bias is when you refuse to listen to contrary opinions, precisely.
You fantasize once more! There is no question of refusing to listen to contrary opinions (it is the role of forums) but to know how many of them have already personally experienced this therapy before giving a precise opinion.
Precisely this type of badly put survey does not present any real interest because it does not give any information if the anti and the pro are it by lived experience or by cultural a priori spread by the media.
this is wrong, it gives information on what each other thinks.
It is one thing to think; but it does not bring anything concrete on the practical level. I can think that quantum mechanics is bullshit, but given my ignorance and my incompetence on this subject, I choose not to express myself except precisely to say bullshit, which would however be an opinion ... but without practical interest .
It is not because YOU you refuse to give your proposal that the others do not exist!
Better to be silent than to make other incompetent proposals. Only competent professionals have done this in all their literature and practice for 150 years, it suffices to refer to it
they're just not going to really be able to figure out how many people agree with them, and ultimately no one will know what their really opinion is on whether or not it is science.
It does not matter what are the biases of one or the other.
If that doesn't interest you as a question, stop polluting it and go post on other more suitable STP threads.
The joker who talks about polluting, he who shamelessly polluted the subject of H without anything, or wanting to know him!
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré