What Does Fibroadenoma Look Like

Discussion: The scientific method is not an opinion.

Some have suggested to me that this proposal could be accused of "obscurantism scientist", ie have the same defects as ideological (but in the opposite direction) that had the Inquisition, what a pity to "theological obscurantism." Well, this position rests on a gross mistake that unfortunately too often make intellectuals of a certain level. The error is to consider "the scientific point of view" as any of the infinite points of view from which it may consider a question. In reality, however, if we limit ourselves to a very specific legal issues, it is undeniable that the scientific point of view is the only one who could have sensibly say. If we have to decide which of two cars we buy, it is clear that the scientific point of view should be considered just one of many criteria by which to choose. Others see a car just like a table of numbers, and who can not do without that piega della lamiera che fa tanto chic. Ma se dobbiamo decidere se una cura sia efficace o meno, o se dobbiamo verificare se una persona sia in grado o meno di prevedere il futuro, non c'è opinione o cultura o storia o filosofia che tenga: solo il metodo scientifico può decidere. Prendiamo il caso di un qualsiasi metodo di trattamento delle malattie, che chiameremo per comodità M. Abbiamo una malattia, e dobbiamo verificare se M possa dare un qualche beneficio. Semplificando, il metodo scientifico richiede che:

1)  M dimostri, in condizioni di controllo, di dare qualche reale beneficio
2)  successivamente, se M funziona, si dia una teoria che spieghi quei risultati and above all they are expected to check other

Attention, science would be happy just to point 1) to accept M. The search for a theory is desirable but not decisive. On the contrary, the only point 2), ie a theory, as beautiful as you want, that provides certain results not confirmed by experience, would be considered at best only as an enjoyable mental exercise.

deny this method in its scope, meaning or be in bad faith, or simply deny the Man, in which case you should refrain from any speech or action that stems from man himself.

Today, there are many methods to support such theories are given only beautiful, millennia of tradition, mountains of Treaties, a myriad of anecdotes and stories, but not even a glimmer of results obtained in control conditions. And their supporters, ignoring completely, good or bad faith, the scientific method, relying on its claim of having credit (in error!) The right principle of respect for pluralism of opinions.

Who counters by saying that science can not explain everything and not everything that is currently scientifically inexplicable is necessarily false, it must have obviously some problem with the logic: the scientific method, does not deny the validity of these due affermazioni, ma esse sono assolutamente inutili a difendere chi tenta di sottrarsi alla sua verifica. La scienza pretende solo di essere in grado di verificare se un raffreddore è stato guarito o meno da una mano imposta sul capo.

Pretendere semplicemente che chi propaganda beni o servizi non si dimentichi dell'onere della verifica scientifica, non è oscurantismo. Lo sarebbe, semmai, il contrario.

Dite la vostra.