4 ms·
> the strong aversion people have for things not being "proven" by western science What does “western” have to do with anything? There is plenty of pseudoscien
by geon 9mo ago
> the strong aversion people have for things not being "proven" by western science
What does “western” have to do with anything? There is plenty of pseudoscience, snake oil and magical thinking in the west. I’d wish people were much more skeptical of anything not scientifically proven.
Or do you imply there is a racist component to it? That could certainly be true.
- cyberpunk 9mo agoThings that don’t get concrete results for people tend not to survive 2000+ years, like meditation, taichi/qigong/whatever; so i don’t think some things really need scientific proof. Even then, how do you scientifically prove if something makes you feel better who really cares if it’s x or y receptor or brainwave pattern or whatever?
- falcor84 9mo agoAstrology is more than 4000 years old, what concrete results did it provide?
- savolai 9mo agoOne could claim it is a self reflection tool where the point is not the claims at face value, but the value lies in the activity itself of focusing, of directing your mind to look at and feel your existence from a different/wide perspective. Which is true about many pedagogical tools. The concrete results would thus be highly specific to the subject and their learning process on what they themselves deem relevant.
- yownie 9mo agoThis has been my answer too, to more analytical minded friends who asked (sardonically). I-ching / tarot can be looked at strictly as systems for structured introspection.
- cyberpunk 9mo agoIt gives people some comfort and motivation, same as religions do. I’m not saying everything that lasted so long has scientifically verifiable benefits, but they clear have some societal or mental benefits otherwise people wouldn’t do em
- muwtyhg 9mo agoThis sounds like saying "Everything that human beings do is good, because if it wasn't, they wouldn't continue to do it!"
- Aeglaecia 9mo agoit may sound like that to you , to me it sounds like survival of the fittest has nothing to do with what we humans choose to define as fit
- edmundsauto 9mo agoSurvival of the fittest is "that which reproduces more successfully, continues". In biology, this is genetics. In ideas, it's memetics. I suppose this means that our most powerful ideas from the internet generation are Rickroll, Doge, and Grumpy Cat.
- mxmilkiib 9mo agoone reflection on that would be the nvc phrase "violence is the tragic expression of unmet needs"
- BobaFloutist 9mo agoOk, then let's put it all together and say that people are interested in whether or not yoga has concrete benefits above and beyond comfort and motivation, which, while obviously valuable, are not the stated benefits.
- foxyv 9mo agoThis is simply an "Appeal to Tradition" fallacy. People do lots of things for thousands of years that are worthless, wrong, or pointless. However, this also doesn't mean that just because we've done these things for a long time that they are in fact pointless. There are methods to prove subjective things like "feeling better." There is in fact a lot of research that shows that meditation and exercise like Taichi is good for you.
- zorobo 9mo agoLike, praying? Or maybe one feels good after sincere prayers, perhaps…
- alfiedotwtf 9mo agoI’ve heard too many stories of people stopping the scientific backed medicines because they’ve thought that prayer was enough. Humans will not be able to evolve until we eradicate religion from the earth.
- moron4hire 9mo agoForgot the ground rhino horn to make your dick hard. What's the thing shark fins are supposed to do? I can never remember.
- IAmBroom 9mo agoPrayer has been around a lot longer than that, and no objective blind tests have ever been able to prove any verifiable results. Longevity of ideas is not correlated with usefulness. Our belief systems are not optimized; they are, like genetic evolution, just 'good enough' to allow survival.
- mapontosevenths 9mo ago> There is plenty of pseudoscience, snake oil and magical thinking in the west This is it exaclty. These folks always forget that it's not the only idea we've heard today. It's basic cost/benefit. This takes 45 minutes to an hour to try out. If it works you "feel better" where "better" is hard to define. Cost = 45 minutes. Benefit = Meh. Since there are about 1 billion things in the world that claim to make me "feel better" at a cost of 45 minutes each I have to really narrow my focus. I can't spend 45 billion minutes for "Meh." In my case this made enough sense that I tried it when I was young and liked it. A lot of folks spent those 45 minutes on something else that seemed more likely to succeed. It's perfectly rational.