Friday, July 28, 2006


[my UBCNM-provided business card & IDs; my UBCNM clinic materials, including the mandatory UBCNM clinic requirements; my secular humanism].
[I. concerning 'naturopathy & I' -- at UBCNM]

I.a. I eventually posted 'humanism' on the box because I found myself, at UBCNM, surrounded by and embedded within and stuck professionally and academically obligated towards so much that was UNETHICAL in this sense:

I.a.01. so much professional SECTARIAN supernatural flapdoodle:

(UBCNM's requisite naturopathic doctrines {naturopathy's essential vitalism, spiritism, teleology & kind} are archived at:

{principle 01 - 'viz medicatrix naturae,'

http://web.archive.org/web/20041022021514/www.bridgeport.edu/ub/nm/Six_Prihtm.htm}

{principle 02 - 'treat the cause,'

http://web.archive.org/web/20041022102837/www.bridgeport.edu/ub/nm/Six_Pritwo.htm}

{principle 03 - 'first do no harm,'

http://web.archive.org/web/20041023022641/http:/www.bridgeport.edu/ub/nm/Six_Prithree.htm}

{principle 04 - 'treat the whole person,'

http://web.archive.org/web/20041023144632/http:/www.bridgeport.edu/ub/nm/Six_PriFour.htm}

{principle 05 - 'physician as teacher,'

http://web.archive.org/web/20041102035514/http:/www.bridgeport.edu/ub/nm/Six_PriFive.htm})

(for a 'flapdoodle' definition click here, http://www.bartleby.com/61/67/F0166700.html)

I.a.02. all calling itself academic scientific medicine!

(UBCNM's simultaneous overarching science claim is archived here, http://web.archive.org/web/20041022020914/www.bridgeport.edu/ub/nm/Today's_Nat.htm).

I.b. While ANY KNOWLEDGE IS DEEMED SCIENTIFIC to naturopaths academically at UBCNM and profession-wide. E.g.: I have termed this UBCNM Dean's "epistemic conflation claimed as specific epistemic type" an "epistemic stupidity:"
(there be GREAT naturopathic flapdoodle at
http://web.archive.org/web/20010701211403/http://www.bridgeport.edu/naturopathy/desc/dean.htm).

[II. Concerning secularism and humanism]

Secularism is the view that church and state (religion and national government) should be kept separate […] A secular dispensation keeps the public domain neutral with respect to all interest groups within it […] Humanism in the modern sense of the term is the view that whatever your ethical system, it derives from your best understanding of human nature and the human condition in the real world. This means that it [humanism] does not, in its thinking about the good and about our responsibilities to ourselves and one another, premise putative data from astrology, fairy tales, supernaturalistic beliefs, animism, polytheism, or any other inheritances from the ages of humankind's remote and more ignorant past. It is possible for religious people to be humanists too: though not without inconsistency or at least oddity, for there is no role to be played in humanistic ethics by their (definingly religious) belief in the existence of supernatural agencies […] People who do not believe in supernatural entities do not have a ‘faith’ in ‘the non-existence of X’ (where X is ‘fairies’ or ‘goblins’ or ‘gods’); what they have is a reliance on reason and observation, and a concomitant preparedness to accept the judgment of both on the principles and theories that premise their actions […and he notes] faith at its quickly-reached limit is the negation of thought.

-- Grayling, A.C. (? ?), in “Gotta Have Faith?”

(click here, http://web.archive.org/web/20070219100236/http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/ac_grayling/2006/11/post_604.html).

[III. Concerning science, & vitalism - spiritism supernaturalism]

[III.a.]

"Naturopathy is a fraudulent approach to medical causation, depending on the hypothetical 'life force' [the 'vis] that supposedly guides healing. No life force has ever been detected, nor has any other supernatural force or being."

-- Center For Inquiry, Florida.

(click here, http://ga1.org/center_for_inquiry/alert-description.tcl?alert_id=2129064; click here for a CFI description, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_inquiry).

[III.b.]

"The supernatural […] refers to entities, forces or phenomena which are not subject to natural laws, and therefore beyond verifiable measurement. Though supernatural refers chiefly to the cause of phenomena (an interpretation), if a phenomenon can be scientifically demonstrated, it is typically no longer considered to be supernatural. Because phenomena must be subject to verifiable measurement and peer review to contribute to scientific theories, science cannot approach the supernatural; see scientific method."

-- Wikipedia {01-28-2007}.

(click here, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernatural; a rather pedestrian resource...BUT, that's what makes this naturopathic 'science-based supernatural-metaphysical-idealistic-teleological-unmeasurable & kind' fallacy SO ABSURD.)

[IV. Also...]

(I have various 'skepticism of naturopathy'-type material at http://youtube.com/daijiyobu).

[Specifically, take the "Naturopathy Blasphemy Challenge"]

Wherein, I disavow the central 'article of faith' of naturopathy, their 'purposeful life spirit' (aka 'the vis').

(click here, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MudHStxAMyM)

.

1 comment:

Deborah said...

Hmm...interesting...hahaha, I have to start using the word "flapdoodle" now. It sounds so COOL!