Movies and television these days are obsessed with stories of “superpowers” that people possess: telepathy, mind control, teleportation, and all types of super soldiers. One superpower is overlooked in these days, and the one superpower that I believe all possess is the conscience. “con” is a latin prefix that means “together, with” and Latin “scientia” means “knowledge, a knowing, expert”. From etymonline.com, conscience comes from Latin consientia “knowledge within oneself, sense of right, a moral sense”. Maybe this was the power that Adam and Eve received from eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. In any case, every human being can be “with science” or conscience/conscious.
Science should also be the basis for gathering knowledge and insight about gout. Science is the key distinguishing feature of our species. As Carl Sagan points out, a good hunter would also need to be a good scientist examining the patterns of their prey and the past success of their methods.
For the experimental sciences where highly controlled conditions can be created, as in chemistry, inference is often a function of measurement. As confounding factors that cannot be eliminated are introduced, statistics have been methodically developed over time. The central limit theorem where the mean (average) observation will tend to the normal distribution as the number of observations increases, even if the distribution of the items themselves is not normal, is an example of powerful mathematical techniques that have been discovered.
For the social sciences (and health is a social science confounded by human beings and the complexity of life), the power of modern science comes from the observation of many. Experiments are designed to make equal as many other factors as possible so that the effect of the factor studied can be measured, on average, and its average effect is (logically) presumed to be highly correlated with the actual effect.
The scientific method is undoubtedly the best way to accrue knowledge but at least two problems exist: science is performed by men who are corruptible, and, science cannot be used for determinations when no unit of measurement exists, or when the experiment cannot be reproduced.
Corruptibility can work by either compromising the experimental design to produce “desired” results or by packaging and disseminating scientific results that do not reflect the reality of what has been found. I think that the vast majority of scientific papers are not biased in any noticeable way, and good information can be gleaned from those willing to put the time in to read them and to invest in the vocabulary to understand them. However, in the provision of “knowledge” that is distributed and becomes accepted/well known there does appear to be very many biases. The most obvious bias is the presentation that there exists a complete or at least competent understanding of the issue/problem. In fact, humans appear to know little about disease, for doctors would live the longest healthiest lives free of addictions and murderous urges, yet a quick glance at simple statistics show that this is not close to being true. Simply understanding certain chemical reactions in the body, does not aid the understanding of a disease in the organism.
Science, like in any other activity where knowledge is power and power generates money, certain financial interests can intervene, and science is not being done for a “greater good”, but rather for the good of (the existing) power. The scientists themselves face huge pressures. Man is loyal to his paycheck, corrupted in the same manner a dog is for his breakfast, no matter what he may say, or “believe” to the contrary.
The well-financed who bankroll foundations or “institutions” are where we should look for the nameless corrupters who desire power above all else (and then look behind the front people). These fronts can cherry pick results, push certain ideas using the awesome power of the purse, reward lackeys with grants, put desired ways of thinking into schools and use the indoctrination techniques of group pressure to imbed false ideas in an entire population. These mandaters of the medical profession appear to wield very real power. (“mandaters” – really! that word fools us all?)
But the most powerful controlling factor is ridicule. Humans have this superpower conscience and so an analysis of relevant facts will lead to understanding even if the force is weak within. So the solution is to ridicule alternative ideas to keep these key observations out of the minds of the population. Ridicule is made possible by giving pieces of paper to scarecrows that are thereby caused to be overconfident and overstate the knowledge that they possess. They then defend the position of the received pieces of paper with all their might, keeping out other “craziness” out of their input stream. Scientists have harnessed electricity and radio waves (light) and have declared themselves masters of knowledge, ridiculing any other mechanism that is not understood. They will blind someone with science by confusing, mystifying, and misleading their enemies based on the position granted by knowledge using large words and ridicule. (Sad to say, but this is exactly what happened to the scarecrow in the Wizard of Oz after Dorothy left. He was such a nice fellow.)
So the received “wisdom” should be suspected and the superpower within of the conscience should be unleashed on all aspects of life (see later blog article on meditation). It reminds me of a Wall Street axiom: “when everyone knows something, it is obviously wrong”. Or as that most famous of philosophers Ozzy Osbourne said, "when you think you know it all, you don't". For example, smoking is obviously not good for health – the body tells you immediately. Just consider the taste (admittedly, a fallible sense) experienced by the smoker who has quit for a few days: it tastes bloody awful! But there are so many reactions that are given off by the body from smoking a cigarette. The feeling of clogs and dirt in the lungs, sweating, tingling on the skin, not being able to run 10 yards without hyperventilating etc., but how long did it take for “science” to prove that smoking was harmful to health? Meanwhile for many years, “9 out of 10 doctors recommend Chesterfield cigarettes” commercials swamped the conscience and sub-conscience of the consumer.
For an individual that is examining health, there are normally no statistical studies that can be undertaken. No study would ever be published on self-experimentation based on a sample of 1. But the individual can design experiments and examine, using awareness and observation. There are laboratory blood tests, measurements of weight etc. But what if many relationships work on a long delay, such as those involved with gout. The reaction from touching the stove to pain happens immediately, but from excessively drinking alcohol to gout takes around 25 years.
Instead the individual is forced to theorize and focus on mechanisms. More like a jigsaw puzzle where, due to confounding factors, the pieces of the puzzle do not fit snugly. But what seems to be the mechanism that is working? This is where science falls down. Science can generate “facts”, at least from measurable subjects, but where does the understanding of the mechanisms working in the world come from?
When you see/observe something the world changes to you. As a kid, I remember looking for bird eggs in a settlement of swamp birds. I couldn’t find any for about an hour. I was just about to give up when I finally saw one. The camouflage was broken. I stood up and looked around and there were hundreds of these bird eggs laid out in plain view. This is the process of discovery. Once you come to a realization, the world is a completely different place.
But the gout warrior who makes use of his conscience, has a great advantage over the disinterested doctor. His body will tell him! For example, in a later reading, I show how the symptoms of gout itself provide valuable information, about what the treatment should be. Understanding the body is part of consciousness. Compare this to relaying symptoms in mere words to a doctor. The communication mechanism is not even used these days – “oh you have gout, here take a (misinformation) pamphlet.”
Be open minded. The attitude should be to associate a probability with each theory/model/mechanism. Nothing is known 100%, and nothing is rejected 0%. What is the problem with having simultaneous conflicting models in the head anyway? It is only necessary to claim complete knowledge if you are a bullying authority. In fact, I’d say it is decadent to consider ONE theory can explain all in all circumstances.
Make an “odds book” on alternative theories and models (ways of thinking). People will ask which horse is going to win the Melbourne Cup. But this is the wrong question. A bookmaker will ask the question: what is the chance of each horse winning the Melbourne Cup? Then they offer odds that reflect those probabilities. A horse with little chance will have long odds. For example, "gout is caused by magical goutal fairies from Painidonia” would be at 200-1, but do you really know enough to exclude it and spit on someone who believes in such a thing? Perhaps their terminology is different, but maybe their model is actually helpful. Perhaps in the end, all models are useless except to the extent that they allow certain actions and the discipline to take certain actions. So admit that we cannot “know” everything, but at the same time it is true that we can be granted the knowledge that we need. We all have a superpower, after all!
Write things down. Maybe you don't often go back to check as the process of writing something down helps to remember, but it is vital to have the original observation and thoughts written down for review. Memory can be influenced by desires and the misinformation of bullying authority figures.
The last point is that conscience is much more than the rational mind. There is a feeling of knowing that does not come from this mortal existence, but from within. Much has been written about this, and many great scientific discoverers admit to this mysterious superpower as the source of their inspiration. Nikola Tesla whose statue in Buffalo I happened to stumble upon once stated: “My brain is only a receiver, in the Universe there is a core from which we obtain knowledge, strength and inspiration. I have not penetrated this core, but I know that it exists.” But this is a feeling, not an emotion. An emotion has physical symptoms such as high blood pressure and close mindedness, while a feeling has an absence of emotion. Some practice is needed to recognize the conscience amongst the whirlwind of the mind, but there is a final overseer, an observer that knows. At least, stop using alcohol and drugs to put that pesky conscience to sleep. As the Jedi say, “search your feelings”.
No comments:
Post a Comment