Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Muz]

Traditional cooking was a joke, but a bad one, since nobody chuckled.

Traditional medicine is by my definition, something that's not "academically accepted". It's when someone gives you Herb A and Herb B when you have a fever, then wake up tomorrow with no fever. Pour the guts of this weird underwater jelly-like creature on your wound, and it heals in a few days and won't get infected. There's no guidelines to it, you just watch people do it, copy, and provide the measurement according to whatever your instincts (and parents) say. If it wasn't for traditional medicine, you'd have millions of extra deaths and infections in second and third world countries. It has Proven Effectiveness, but unfortunately, it's not passed down the same way as modern medicine.. you don't learn it in class.

Exorcism works the same way. It could be a traditional approach to mental problems. You basically have:
Cause - A ghost or victim believes that (s)he is being possessed
Effect - Twitching, voice changes pitch, rambling zombie-like behavior, tendency to go berserk, random screaming, wailing, and crying. Sometimes contagious.
Cure - Exorcist doing some fancy mumbo jumbo
Result - All the bad effects are gone within a few days.

It acts just like medicine in the sense that it works. It really shouldn't leave any negative effects. And yeah, there are some people who lay down techniques for them, similar to CPR training, though the intriguing thing is that very different techniques can have the same results.

[Halmie]

I agree totally with this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB_htqDCP-s concerning most paranormal stuff.

It might be a little tough on those who sort of believe.

[ChairmanPoo]

Ghost reporting

[Jude]

Exorcisms may work as a placebo effect but I have a hard time believing that there's not a better way to treat cases of "possession"

[MrWiggles]

Ghost reporting

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Honest sincere laughter.

[alway]

though the intriguing thing is that very different techniques can have the same results.

It's called a placebo.

[MrWiggles]

Traditional cooking was a joke, but a bad one, since nobody chuckled.

Traditional medicine is by my definition, something that's not "academically accepted". It's when someone gives you Herb A and Herb B when you have a fever, then wake up tomorrow with no fever. Pour the guts of this weird underwater jelly-like creature on your wound, and it heals in a few days and won't get infected. There's no guidelines to it, you just watch people do it, copy, and provide the measurement according to whatever your instincts (and parents) say. If it wasn't for traditional medicine, you'd have millions of extra deaths and infections in second and third world countries. It has Proven Effectiveness, but unfortunately, it's not passed down the same way as modern medicine.. you don't learn it in class.

Uh... Third world countries have the worse mortality rate for its health care because it doesn't have a strong base of modern medicine. Could you foster your statics there?

Medical Academia doesn't have a bias toward medicine because its been coined traditional. If it works, its get used. In your example, herbalism has been replaced with pharmacology. The purified, control amount of the minuet effectual chemicals in the sea of none effectual chemicals of those herbs. Modern pharmacology has it roots in alchemy, and herbalism, as its a specialized school of chemistry. In south america, a local remedy was to douse a cloth in in a certain kind of ant, and it acted as a pain killer, which lead to a room temperature stored pain killing, omipent hat didn't need the carvanious ants.

India life span grew greatly with the introduction of sanitation and modern medicine in the span of one generation.

If you having trouble fostering your hopeful statics, I would suggest using World Health Organization as a resource.

Exorcism works the same way. It could be a traditional approach to mental problems. You basically have:
Cause - A ghost or victim believes that (s)he is being possessed
Effect - Twitching, voice changes pitch, rambling zombie-like behavior, tendency to go berserk, random screaming, wailing, and crying. Sometimes contagious.
Cure - Exorcist doing some fancy mumbo jumbo
Result - All the bad effects are gone within a few days.

It acts just like medicine in the sense that it works. It really shouldn't leave any negative effects.

It doesn't work as medicine, as it doesn't work. No studies have shown any effect greater then the control group. Psychology isn't against using helpful tools.

And yeah, there are some people who lay down techniques for them, similar to CPR training, though the intriguing thing is that very different techniques can have the same results.

If there no correct method to performing it, then there nothing to perform.

And just to stop one avenue of counter argument, the effectiveness of excorosim, isn't a value judgement. So going the route of showing on how art has no correct method would be an incorrect avenue, as art is a value judgement.

[Morrigi]

I agree totally with this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB_htqDCP-s concerning most paranormal stuff.

It might be a little tough on those who sort of believe.

Genius.

[MrWiggles]

So excorosim, and ghost share a core issue that prevents plausibility of factuality, and that the issues of duality. An idea, that has no imperial basis, but logically inconstant.

Also, Muz, linked to WHO, a good site overall, then you go over and look at mortality rates and countries that have been known to use none proven medicine, which if you read the linked page to WHO said they(traditional medicine) weren't proven effective, and that it was difficult task to perform.

Anyway, if you look at Kenya, whose witch doctor are known to drag albino, woman and children, well any age, cut them up to make magic potions has deplore mortality rate then compared to United Kingdom. Then if you look over to Nigera, who life expectancy is forty five, is even worse off. Then if you look over to Libera its even worse especially compared to Canada. Its like there a correlation with industrialization, and actual medicine to health care.

[Cheeetar]

If you believe ghosts are real, you're much more likely to take a strange event and say a ghost did it.

[Muz]

<stuff>

OK, let's stop. This is ridiculous. You're not going to convince me and I'm not going to convince you.

You can't convince me because there's some very solid experience around here. You're pulling out extreme examples, which aren't even logically sound. And you're tossing up straw men all over the place.

I can't convince you because there's just no evidence on it. Research in a third world country is only spent on things that make money and things that make the government look good. Nobody pays to examine something that's already proven to work. It's difficult to get accurate statistics on literacy in Borneo, much worse with anything decent.

The only way to convince you is for you to come and see it here. Because videos and Internet statistics won't be enough. Both can be faked easily. So, I'll concede the argument if you don't want to call it a draw

[Cheeetar]

You didn't actually explain where his strawmen were, or how he wasn't logically sound.

[Muz]

If I did, then there'd be more arguments. I'll do it in a PM if he wants it. Enough derailing.

[MrWiggles]

It would be more helpful to actually point where the straw men are, then simply stating they are there. Using the language doesn't proffer correct usage. I would prefer not to use them as I may have and if I looked at more closely possible. If I am using fallacies then that weakens my counter points, and diminishes my side. It doesn't necessarily buff your side through the gates validity. I sincerely ask you to point out where they are. Hell, it doesn't matter who points them out, bystanders are more then welcome.

I sorta pointed a straw man to you last page when you try to insert what my stance was, which I rebutted with my actual stance quoted where I cleanly stated it.

And my stance is sound.

A does not do X, because there no evidence that A does X. You conceded there is no evidence that it does what it claims. Which means that it doesn't do anything.

And loads of research have been poured into folk remedies, it just that most of them don't do anything. Some of them are harmful even. A good portion of actual medicine has its root in so called traditional medicine and other form of magical thinking. Its been well weeded over the last few centuries though to what actually works.

A traditional medical cure for head aches was to make a tea from willow bark, now thanks to that we have aspirin that you can buy almost anywhere for a few bucks for an off name brand.

However, I dont think grinding down rhino horn and making a potion from it will cure erectile dysfunction, no matter how phallic the horn is. That nother traditional medical cure in africa, the culture that believes me escape me but if so wanted I can probably find it.


I am also perfectly able to change my mind. I can answer the question of 'what will change my mind' most readily and soundly. I challenge you Muz, to answer the same. What will change your mind?

A personal experience is powerful, but woefully flawed when trying to determine factuality and effectiveness. For this very reason, is why experiments are done with blinds, controls and when ever possible double blinds to help delimit the influence of horrible personal perception.

I have no doubt you experience these things and know they work. I have no doubt you are not spreading knowable falsehoods. I however hold my personal experience back knowing they are flawed, and knowing they are biased as that why I never once spoken to my personal experience, as when it comes to objective values its worthless. And to the subject of value judgments, like a pair of good knockers, good pasta, fine art, that guys an ass, then personal experience is the most valuable and even can be reenforced and stabilized with critical thinking.

And I applaud you, as you were in the affirmative for this debate, you carried the proof of burden on your side.