skepticism

[gusl]

I am a Randian, in the sense of James Randi. I wish he would open a placebo healing school.

I would like to see a community of skeptics who are into all kinds of mind&body work: meditation, NLP, visualizations, and even outright placebo pills (possibly involving intentional self-deception). What I want is a reliable way of judging what an "alternative therapy" is good for.

I think that people who give "alternative healings" / "spiritual work" provide real value in some cases, but that they would benefit a lot from some healthy self-skepticism. For one thing, they wouldn't alienate scientifically-minded people as much, and open the doors to collaboration.

Btw, it's hard to call my position "scientific" or "skeptic", because all these words have unintended connotations. So "JamesRandian" seems like a better choice.

Here's a reference:

* Adv Mind Body Med. 2000 Winter;16(1):33-46.
Placebo and health--II. How to produce not only powerful but, more importantly, reliable placebo healing and analgesia.

Here's a link for me to check later: http://mypage.uniserve.com/~jcmooney/more.htm

Comments

[selfishgene.livejournal.com]

Assume part of the benefit derives from patients believing in the treatment. If they find out the practitioner is skeptical the treatment will cease to work. The practitioner probably finds it easier to display belief if they really do believe.
Scientists should assess treatments empirically. Failure to understand the method of operation is not good reason to dismiss an effective treatment. Of course, the efficacy of these treatments is often only anecdotal.