Empirical Methods: Empowerment or Estrangement?
Opinion viewpoints to consider on the subject of science and holistic tradition.
By Art Tucker
January/February 1997
In casual conversations with some herbalists, I have encountered a distinct antiscience bias. How did this arise? Scott Adams provides a clue in The Dilbert Principle (HarperBusiness, 1996):
RELATED CONTENT
A discovery of pharmaceutical herb boxes leads to an adventure in herbal and medicinal history....
Little Medicine: The Wisdom to Avoid Big Medicine (1995) takes its name from a distinction Native A...
Jean Carper shares her research into the use of medicinal herbs and their potential within the U.S....
Learn about the different types of alternative medicine, herbs that can improve your health and how...
“All the technology that surrounds us, all the management theories, the economic models that predict and guide our behavior, the science that helps us live to eighty—it’s all created by a tiny percentage of deviant smart people. The rest of us are treading water as fast as we can. The world is too complex for us.”
Right on, Scott! Science may provide answers, but the process has become so far removed from the reality of everyday life that many have become estranged from it and no longer feel empowered by science or its promises. Sometimes even scientists and researchers like myself can feel overwhelmed by the shear force and momentum of scientific progress.
To make matters worse, certain scientists (and, unfortunately, some physicians) claim to have all of the answers, and they often create antipathy with their callous and superior attitudes. Their failure to acknowledge the inherent limitations of science causes some people operating outside the traditional medical community, including many herbalists, to become frustrated with the scientific establishment.
Scientists might do well to remember that empirical science as practiced today has changed little since it was formulated by Francis Bacon (1561–1626) in his Novum Organum (1620). We have added various bells and whistles, such as double-blind studies with a placebo, 95 percent confidence intervals, and computer software with multivariate statistics, but the essence of what scientists practice is still Baconian. If an observation or event cannot be measured by our five senses (or mechanical extensions) and statistically repeated, then it falls outside empirical science. Gods, goddesses, and miracles (and, some might add, parapsychology and homeopathy) are relegated to a belief-based world. This does not mean that they do not exist; rather, it means that empirical science cannot prove that they exist.