that is just a pile of words that mean sod all. I know for a fct that no suc evidence xists. you are making a continuous fool of yourself by stating there is. I had at the first explained to you tat it's been proved that the mental health systems much lauded procedure for 'discovering mental illness' in the brain---ie EEG scans etc etc have been proved to be false. There was a big article about it, including the New York Times. obviously you are still behind with this. If you like i will do this for you. I will give yo the email of a respected Doctor who is very knowing about tis subject, Dr Fred Baughman, and you can contact him and inform him of your 'certantites' and then show us your discussion about tis wit him--if you so wish one thing i dont want is going round in fukin circles about tis. i find you a very arrogant person and dont enjoy discusin much wit you about such an important subject
Your words mean sod all, because not only are you uneducated on this topic, you have an agenda which is causing you to deny the evidence - that is you are afraid of the implications - and that someone might know something you don't. Just because there was an article in the Times doesnt mean shit. You of all critics should know this. I have seen EEG recordings work. First hand. I have carried them out myself. I have put the sticky electrodes on the asian guys head, plugged them into the recording box, plugged that into the computer, run the software, and seen the results caused by him doing different things with his mind. I just wrote a 1600 word paper on that experiment. Thats the one you inspired me to finish! So your argument is officially sunk. If you had a bad experience with the mental health system, like you spoke to a shrink that was a dickhead, then i'm genuinely sorry about that. It happens. There are some shrinks who are dickheads, its not uncommon for some of them to be cold and seem like they don't care. I've met a couple like that. If not bothering with that "system" - works for you, if smoking weed is all you need (just like 3 of my closest friends), then thats fine with me. And here's another thing - when I finish my studies and probably end up working in the mental health system, I'm not going to imprison anyone, or deprive anyone of their rights, or give people drugs they don't want, or tell people that something is "wrong" with them. What's more I will stick up for people - if I see bad shrinks doing that shit, I'm going to say something about it and make a stand! ADHD is over diagnosed I think, and adhd medication is over perscribed. Despite there being some kids who do have ADD or ADHD (I went to school with a guy who told me later he couldnt have finished school without help for his ADD) and there are some kids who need medication, I still think its over perscribed to a lot of kids. I think thats a society problem. We need more good male primary teachers, and kids need to spend more time with their fathers. Now THATS a problem with western society.
THATS more like it. I respect that....But i would add that it's not just qbout not giving people drugs they dont want, but supplying them wit informed consent. thismans tat they must know that they do NOT have a biological disease called mental illness
You are definitely not a scientist by temperament, even if you’re studying science. You show so much emotions and hostility where people are sharing their points of view trying to be reasonable and objective. I don’t see the point in getting personal here. Even, if you have had different experiences, and don’t agree with the others, it is no reason why you can’t engage in a logical sharing of those experiences without being abusive. It’s only when you stop getting agitated that you can see things in clear, ‘scientific’ perspective. For one thing, Scientists capable of empathy as people does not mean that the scientific methodology has room for empathy. Can’t you see the difference between scientists as people and Science as an institution. Of course there are good and bad people (and all the shades of inbetweens) amongst the scientists – but we are discussing sceince as an institution here. Though I can’t talk about all kinds of mental illnesses --- there probably are many known scientific conditions which are clear pathology and can be clearly proven to be caused by viruses or things like that --- but it is a fact that the area of mental illnesses is a grey area, and it can be abused by (and has been abused by) those in control to victimise those they want to persecute. This is what happens when science tries to tread the path it is not equipped to deal with. Why can’t they teach some empathy and humility in universities? Not to mention manners. What kind of good work can scientists do if they are not willing to even consider experiences of others? I think it’s extremely typical of scientists to see this world in black and white. So, either you are with science or against it. You can’t be advocating a middle path. That is not ‘natural’ or ‘scientific’ for them. No body is saying that science is completely useless. It has done some good work. Although, there may be hidden costs for all of science’s miracles --- that’s another story. We are warning against the tendency to deitify it and consider it a panacea for everything that afflicts or concerns this world. And to give it so much power that it attracts and becomes a victim of human power politics. That will nullify the good work science has done. Just like in the past, organised religion nullified the positive effects of spirituality. That’s a cinch. Since my forte is sexuality, I’ll take an example from that field. For decades sexual desire between males was classified as a mental disease supported by technically correct scientific studies by psychologists and scientists. Yet, in 1973, the American association of scientists back tracked. Why? If psychology is an absolute truth, how can it’s results derived after adopting the standard procedures be turned on their face? I distinctly remember a counseling case where a devastated teenager had come to me --- telling that he either wants a cure for his homosexuality (sic) or wants to die. He was told by his peers that ‘homosexuality’ is a disease that some boys have. He consulted an encylopedia in the school library which confirmed his worst fears --- that he has the most abominable disease. It stated that there are no medicines or other cures that can alter the condition of ‘homosexuality’. But, its not only that farce of a science --- psychology which is so shaky. Let’s take human biology. For decades scientists claimed that masturbation is dangerous and very harmful. So much so that doctors used to prescribe gears which locked the penis of adolescents, and the parents kept the keys. Today, when the western society advocates over indulgence in sex, the same science does a turn around and says masturbation is completely harmless. And it’s again not telling the truth. Actually, masturbation is an interesting case in hand (no pun intended!). It clearly shows how blind science can be towards the feelings, experiences and pains of people. It blindly follows the criteria of “only that which can be seen exists”. Thus, since for science masturbation only consists of what is discharged by way of semen, and from the clinical analysis available to science as of now, what the body looses is equivalent to a spoonful of sugar --- masturbation is adjudged to be completely harmless. However, to be a man is to know that masturbation (for that matter semen discharge through any method) after a limit (a limit which keeps varying!) brings about all sorts of ill feelings. Science has been telling young people for decades now that all those feelings of weakness, or joint pains of pangs of memory loss and everything else that they feel is just psychological --- in their heads. It’s amazing how powerful science has become that it can negate what the entire male population so overwhelmingly feels, and sticks by what it has been able to see. This brings me to another big drawback of science. That it is so conceited that it believes that ‘what it cannot see does not exist’. It is not willing to consider that it may not have the necessary tools yet to see what is obviously there. It is a clear proof of their blatant conceitedness --- a result of irrational and unscientific blind faith that we have placed in science --- that scientists consider it beneath their status to admit that they are incapable of analysing or diagnosing something. It’s not an uncommon experience to be told by a doctor that the pain you are experiencing is only in your mind --- when all the tests they can think of come out to be normal. You are perfectly alright, as far as science is concerned. Doesn’t matter if you are defecating blood. It’s all your brains fault. Which is inadvertently taken to mean that you are crazy! I had one such horrible experience in my adolescence when I developed an ulcer in my stomach. But at that time, nobody believed that children can have ulcers. So they conducted whatever tests they could think of and adjudged me healthy. I used to have terrible, terrible pain in my stomach (I ate lots of spicy food!) and my doctor one day told me I had a psychological problem. The way she told me, it was like I was an abnormal child, crazy. That sort of thing can be devastating for a teenager. Then I turned to alternative treatment and within one month my pain was totally gone. Two years later, the pain returned and this time my ulcer bursted and bled for one month --- without me being any wiser. It was when I fainted that they took me to the hospital and found out the problem. And also found out scars from an old ulcer. Since then my ulcer has kept coming and going. Someimes they could find it through bioscopy or x-ray, and sometimes they could not. When they could not, they just said my pain was psychological. But I never believed them, having gained through experience. I had stopped responding to allopathic medicines. Doctors kept telling me that my ulcer is because of psychological stress. And that I have to change my ways because medical science cannot do anything about it. I was referred to a psychiatrist who prescribed me all sorts of tablets to take. I was wise enough to ignore his advise and decided to again resort to alternative medicines. It was through my own research that I found out about Helico Bacter Pylori bacteria and got myself tested for it. I came out positve. I took treatment, and within a month I was perfectly normal for the first time in 10 years. Similarly, scientists have been dismissing millions of people suffering extreme ill health because of stomach problems as psychological cases. They have cleverly found a new name for it too --- the IBS. Because science has been unable to find out the causes. They obstinately force psychological treatment on people when in most cases they fail to have any effect. There is a group on the net which gives information about a particular protozoan infection of the gut --- which the mainstream scientists obstinately refuse to consider harmful, yet a few scientists have successfully cured their patients by treating for this infection. It’s called D. fragilis. People who have responded successfully to its treatment have previously been diagnosed as having IBS, and told there was no treatment. Traditional systems of medicines, however provide a lot of relief to those classified as suffering from IBS. Actually, one can write a book about the science misleading people and being an agent in their oppression.
If only science could be used with discretion, and if only people who ‘own’ science could understand its limits --- but it would be too much to expect. The problem is that any human institution that generates blind faith in people --- and thus places a lot of power in the hands of people who rule that institution --- eventually gets to be abused and corrupted. That is what happened with religion in the medieval times. The history is repeating itself with sceince. The problem with science is that it is in response to a negative phenomenon --- religion. Thus it is partial and carries a lot of negative baggages with it.
This is another perfect example of how the scientific institution keeps dishing out data by conducting insincere studies in abstracts. They dole out ambiguous results that are easily distorted and misinterpreted by people as they go down from mouth to mouth. Till it pervades the society as a strong myth. Sometimes people take important decisions in life based on those information. Sometimes they build strong biases and hatred on their basis.
It has been proven time and time again, that the scientific interpretations of data found in the world, is the most reliable. You can’t place the responsibility of data dispersal and interpretation in the hands of the data creators. Any well rounded individual knows not to hold anything as truth or in faith. Science invades every part of our life. From the discovery of fire, to life saving medicine and vaccinations. Science has been with us since before religion, i would even suggest that one of sciences great inventions is religion. Also lost in this debate is the fact that science is not about truth or meaning, but about procedure and result. Good science develops a consistent procedure with a consistent result. There is no faith required. In the end it does not matter what you believe. Fire is fire and unless you rely on the random chance of nature to create your fire, you will put your faith, and most importantly effort, into the tried and proved scientific methods developed over the past 80 thousand years. Remember the why is not important, the how is what science is about.
none of wat you just said made any sense to me whatsoever.......sciewnce invented religion?.....says who?...you got it right though when you use the terminology 'science INVADES every cornerof our lives'...THAT is the PROBLEM. sciencein its present - mainstream - materialistic mode trying to go places it shouldn't and making a complete opprssive mess if science is seen to favour logic, i am not anti-logic/rason. i am anto so-alled 'logic' pretending it can dictate what we and reality IS, when really it doesn't know but tries to anyhow--generally. ie., its metaphysical assumptions infiltrate nealry all our institutions
I admit that I got emotional and hostile, but duendy was not being reasonable and objective, or logical at all. If someone tells you there is no proof that the world is round, what are you supposed to reply? So I'm through discussing this issue with him. His bias and paranoia, and hatred of "the man" is excessive. "metaphysical assumptions infiltrate nealry all our institutions", what like 8th grade science? what, you want our kids learning intelligent design? You raise some excellent points about the mistakes science has made, i'm sure those mistakes caused stress for the patients involved, including yourself. I'm sorry to hear about your ulcers and yes science has made a mistake. The people that failed to diagnose you properly - and misdiagnosed you - were at fault (science failing) - and you had to take the iniative yourself, but it was also because of science (good science) that you were able to research into Helico Bacter Pylori bacteria and find a treatment that really cured you. However I would like to point out again that whilst science has made mistakes and has corrected them - and will correct their mistakes in the future, christianity has been far worse an offender with these victimisations and persecutions - and continues with them today!! Even back as early as Kinsey's work "Kinsey's research on human sexuality profoundly influenced social and cultural values in the United States during the 1960s with the advent of the sexual revolution." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Kinsey ...science was beginning to suggest that homosexuality was not an "illness", and your correct, in 1970's they backtracked and they changed the DSM so being homosexual was no longer an illness. Yet even TODAY (2005) there are so many christians (particularly catholics) saying that it is wrong, a "choice", an "abomination", a "sin" etc. Same with masturbation, science may have at one time claimed that over masturbation was harmful, but religious freaks are still claiming that TODAY. The persecution of people who (naturally) started masturbating, is unforgivable. In the 1960's young adolescent women in convents were told that their menstrual bleeding was a punishment for their masturbation! "what the entire male population so overwhelmingly feels," There is no evidence I'm aware of that suggests that excessive masturbation alters testosterone levels, and I've never heard of any symptoms or ill feelings from over masturbation. At some stages some adolescents do it 2-3 times a day with no ill effects. Remember Buddha1 that your bias (e.g. Your criticism of heterosexuality) is evident here. In conclusion, yes science has made many mistakes, and people have suffered as a result, but it is willing to correct them. Christianity and Islam, though, will collapse before they ever move forward. The vatican didn't apoligise to galileo and concede the world was ROUND till 1992!! I have a muslim penpal from Lebanon who is gay and he has serious issues as a result of the dissonance between the fact he is gay and his belief in islam. He knows what is right, but he still suffers from the dilemma every day. Many priests still urge people to "choose" not to be gay. or to CHANGE. The thing is though, if people don't want a "medical" treatment, they don't have to receive it! They can just walk away, or they can decline it (or their parents can). So how is that oppressing people? So if people seek help from science and are mislead, thats a shameful mistake, but its not oppression. Christianity, Islam, Judaism, on the other hand continue to push themselves on people, either you accept it in its entirety or you are not going to "heaven". On the other hand, if you don't accept the elementary laws of physics, the fact that the world is round, etc, your just considered a moron. How rude? Eastern religions have so much more going for them. They are much more open minded IMO. "Ethics" are a very strong focus in university nowadays. There are entire subjects about ethics, designed to teach students to be ethical and to handle moral dilemmas with thought and care.
You still don’t understand.. Science in no way pretends to anything. Only people dictate and pretend. Science is only method, nothing more. You don’t have to believe or have faith for science to work for you. That’s why many scientists are also religious.
no, its a perfect example of how the majority of society misinterprets what they don't understand. the myth that we only use 10% of our brain was started by a misquote and propagated by popular media.
hah...yes, religioos. beliving in the phony religion tat science originally challenged. so twice duped.......a farce. part materialistic, part beliving in a sky-god
It is a fact that science, and for that matter logic cannot fully explain our universe. Because our existence and this universe defies any logic. All things physical have a beginning and an end. All things physical started at some place in time. But if our universe has an end then what lies beyond it? And beyond? Where does it all end? And what is beyond that? Similarly, when did our universe start? What was before that? And before? It is all mind boggling. Human mind, with all its ‘superiority’ is not equipped to percieve this aspect, at least not with logic and science, because it has a non-physical dimension and thus beyond science. This is where other faculties of human perceptions become important --- faculties that science dismisses, or denigrates as ‘fake’ or non-existent. Spirituality is one of those things. Inspite of some well meaning efforts, you cannot understand spirituality by a human faculty (science) which is only capable of perceiving that which has a physical and verifiable existence. This does not mean that we should accept what is given to us in the name of spirituality with closed eyes. But we should not at the same time deny its existence or usefulness in our lives. Thus we cannot endlessly use science to understand life. Science has a limit. Truth has none. Thus truth is made up of more than logic and science. In fact in the end the physical part of this life is a deception.
In order to live healthy, balanced and meaningful lives human beings must find a balance between all of human faculties ( I can only think of science (I suppose that denotes our mental/ logical/ intellectual faculties) and spirituality, but surely there are others, e.g. emotions and instincts (e.g. premonitions)). An over reliance on science is bound to lead to an imbalanced and harmful society. In the beginning we used to have a comprehensive outlook towards life --- and what we today call science or spirituality were indistinguishable parts of that outlook. That is the most ideal, healthy and natural way to be. As we progressed, we started separating our faculties --- primarily to abuse them for garnering power. First came spirituality which became organised religion. And now we have science. People in pre-religion, ancient times used to maintain a balance in their lives – something that we have lost. E.g. many cultures had divided their life into phases where they could attain one aspect of life in each phase. Youth was for materialistic pursuits, middle-age for social pursuits (e.g. rearing of children) and the old age was for spiritualistic pursuits when people used to become ascetics --- leaving the material comforts, spending the rest of their lives in forests. Today we have become purely materialistic (apart from a few who join cults and are considered freaks!), practical, logical and scientific. This means an imbalanced, unhealthy, unhappy life and one that has broken its connection with nature. One that is spiteful of nature.
Not yet. It took 2000 years to verify the atomic theory put forward by the ancient Greeks, it may take 500 or even 1000 to verify the existence of multiverse. Just because we are not able to do something at this moment doesn't mean that we won't be able to do that in the future. In fact science, or the facts that science reveals - the nature of the universe - is very spiritual, more than most religions out there (spiritual as = something for a human mind to dive in and shout "oh, gloria"), besides it's not fantasy. And there is no conflict between science and mysticism. Any revelations that Buddhism has you can extract from present day cosmology. Science is about finding out the true nature of the universe - with no wishful thinking, with no wishful fantasies and no denial of contradictions.
Blindman and Avatar make some excellent points. Science is a method (the most accurate method so far) of finding the truth (as opposed to praying or other magical thinking). Furthermore, for everyone who has studied the sciences of biology, they have marvelled even more at the beauty and complexity of life, those who are passionate about physics, marvell at the wonder of the universe. People who study geology or meteorology, wonder at the special miracle that is our planet earth. "Today we have become purely materialistic (apart from a few who join cults and are considered freaks!), practical, logical and scientific. This means an imbalanced, unhealthy, unhappy life and one that has broken its connection with nature. One that is spiteful of nature. " Man you are so ignorant. Science is the study of nature, and to be willing to study nature you must appreciate it to start with! What about the science of botany? Are you saying that it is spiteful, that instead of eating a flower or plant (nature) a scientist might pick it off the tree, and take it to a place to study it? take pictures or look at it close up? Vet's have a greater connection with animals than you or I could ever dream of - they heal them, help them, understand and ease their suffering, on a daily basis. Why don't you buy a scientific book about nature, you'd really enjoy it. Start with flowers or little furry creatures if you like. Just because science can discover things, (and that threatens some people - because they aren't willing to learn) doesn't make them less wonderful, or "take the magic away" - in fact it makes them more wonderful!! So learning about, and getting closer to knowing the true nature, and all the wonders, of life, the planet, the stars etc, increases our appreciation of these things! Buddha1, Who are you to dare to presume that other people are "unhealthy" or "unhappy"? (BTW More women commit suicide in China than in the west) Just cause you think you are a buddhist. You fucking preacher. I (and most others on this forum) really enjoy learning about life, the world, people, animals etc. - and I'd like to make a POSITIVE contribution one day, to help those things. My mum (even though she is in her 40s) is studying to be a midwife - so she can help deliver babies (in a natural setting aswell) and make sure nothing goes wrong, and make sure the babies are healthy and that they don't die etc, and to comfort the mother and make sure she is ok. Does she find the science difficult? Yes. very. If she didn't know about that science, would she fuck up? Probably. Does it bring her great joy, the fact she has already delivered healthy babies? Definately. And I am so proud of her, and her efforts to become a midwife (after being a musician her whole life) it brings a tear to my eye. If you like meditating good for you. If you don't like having sex with women than good for you, don't have any children (part of life) if you don't want. But don't preach your ignorant beliefs here and pretend to be all friendly and open minded - cause your not.
Huwy...can you not make your points without also insulting people, like you've done wityh me and recenly Buddha1...yes? no? which......... you type: 'Science is a method the most accurate method so far) of finding the truth as opposed to praying or magical thinking)' right so by 'science' you are meaning POSITIVIST science, right. which demands that only through the scientific method can one discover THE 'truth'?.....well i am saying that that idea is the OPPRESSIONof sciencism.....We mustn't forget themental health scam. that too is puportedly to follow the acientific metod, but it is an evil scam fostered on the gullibl by thensidiouscartel of pharmaceutical industry. science, psychiatry/psychology and government. So tht purs paid to your limited view of things doesn't it? Dear god, te arrogance of tat view which rights off all 'pre-scienific-metod' Indigenous peoples, who DID haveinsight...some much deeper than your regular white-coat specaalist may have, i can tell you. Who are caught up in their mind/body split mindset.....! 'Science is the study of nature, and to be willing to study nature you must appreciate it to begin with' oh my my, and you are suggesting that materialistic science has done that are you??....you see the state of the world and you can actually believe that nnesense? dont know what to say....am speechless. for now Look . there are much deeper ways to commune wit Nature which includes whole being. THAT is more important. science can come after 'Vets have a greater connection with animals than you or i could ever dream of' well, MY experience of vets is that they fukin fleece you of your money. a soddin inJECTIn might set you back £70.....dont know about dollars. theydont hvew TIME to 'bond' wid the aimals. it is like a conveyor belt of sicjk animals kind of ting....what AREyo goin on with. you should talk for yourself. you do NOT have to be a vet to love and understand animals
who said the mind and body were separate? The mind is part of the body, therefore like the body, it can become sick, and ill. Cells, Chemicals - they have to be in balance. See? Mental illness has been proven through a number of validated measures - since your szasz croc wrote his book in 1960. If you think its a scam good for you. If you think aids is a conspiracy you can believe that too. The irony is that you use the internet to post your arguments. How does that work? I never said you had to be a vet to love and understand animals. If you don't like the vets injection, then you can choose not to ask for it, as is your right. They do charge a lot, I need to save to vaccinate my cat, because I love her, and I dont want her to get sick. I bet you wouldn't even vaccinate your children! and those children would contract whooping cough, and meningococcal, and spread it to other children. You know what? IF you hate the system so much, the medical system, the western system, "the man", why live amongst it, in the UK? Your posting on the internet remember? I'm not poking fun or being racist or anything (I hate my own government atm), but if the system causes you so much grief, why live in a western society? Why not choose to live more naturally, be self sustained, without a government telling you what to do? If you prefer the indigenous peoples, why not live amongst them - as nature intended? Not trying to be rude or insulting, just posing a question.
i do try and live susytainable////WHAT Indigenous people??? they've long been crushed, and their history suppressed, here in UK as they have been and are being by the scientific mindset you defend to the dying breath!
On an unrelated note, I've seen a few documentary videos of the lives of indigenous people (the filming group lived for a year with various tribes across the world), it's nothing to be desired. Really, there is nothing romantic there as some western people think it is. I don't know about you, but I like the Internet with it's massive amounts of available infromation, I like books on various sciences and arts, I like to go to Opera and enjoy an evening relaxing on pillows in a tea house and talking with friends about art, science, the nature of reality, then go home and listen to beautiful music on stereo, and so on. While living in the forest/jungle/savanna there's nothing of that and catching a meal and not getting sick is the primary worry.
