Naturopathy - "Religion Rather Than Science" - Wired Inspired, 2008:

a recent Wired Science article reminded me of what I've learned about the essentially religious / sectarian nature [context] of natural medicine / naturopathy, falsely [shamelessly!] presented by naturopathy to the public as science when profoundly not:

001. Wired Science states in "McCain's VP Wants Creationism Taught in [Public] School" {2008-08-29}:

"Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin wants creationism taught in [public school] science classes [yikes!...yet] state and federal courts have repeatedly rejected so-called creation science in public schools, calling it religion rather than science [...e.g.] the latest courtroom defeat came in the 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover case, when the superficially religion-neutral theory of intelligent design was classified as religious creationism [...e.g.] the Supreme Court ruled in 1987 that teaching creationism [in public schools] violated the separation of church and state";

Note: historically, in the sense that creationism is supernatural and theistic dogma / based upon articles of faith / a creed, it is not scientific / based upon evidence / subject to revision -- therein, it is religious.

002. naturopathy's supernaturalism and theism type:

002.a. naturopathy is based upon the belief that physiology is run by a 'purposeful life spirit';

002.b. the theistic type that naturopathy essentially entails is "autoentheism." This is a term I coined to succinctly describe the naturopathic belief that 'god is within oneself controlling physiology as that life force';

003. the kicker, of course, is that naturopathy claims to be scientific, when essentially not [science PROFOUNDLY rejects vitalism, rejects supernaturalisms]. It is, essentially, religious / sectarian rather than science:

for a brief definition of sectarian, see Popular Science Monthly {Nov. 1889, v.36, p.122}:

"science is never sectarian; philosophy is never sectarian. Sectarian teaching begins when you ask a man or a child to assume what can not be proved, for the sake of keeping within the dogmatic lines that fence round some particular creed."

University of Bridgeport's Falsehood 2008 - Their Naturopathic 'Confidence Game':

[ten years ago this month, I began an ND at UB, and therein, I gained expertise in these matters over the course of four years there. Overall, I consider naturopathy to be 'an unethical sectarian pseudoscience.' Here's my commemoration page].

a warning, from one who was snookered, concerning UB's game of labeling their 'naturopathic program educational product' as "professional" and "science" [see 01. below], when naturopathy is essentially about falsely representing profoundly -- for decades and centuries -- nonscientific premises like vitalism [see 02. below] and supernaturalism [see 03. below] as scientific [for what science says, see 04. below] through the use of a confidence-building "university" & "professionally accredited" veneer:

01. the University of Bridgeport states in "UB Spotlight: Health Sciences Programs":

"the University's professionally accredited health sciences programs [...include] the College of Naturopathic Medicine [...our] Naturopathic Medicine (N.D.) [degree] offer[s] state-of-the-art curricula [...] the members of the faculty include skilled instructors with backgrounds in the biomedical and clinical sciences";

Note: UB's use of the label SCIENCE upon the naturopathic, and their emphasis on "state-of-the-art," profession's level curricula, with a skilled SCIENCE faculty. Let's shine my spotlight a little closer, to see the actual-underneath of the naturopathic, below this veneer:

02. vitalism is at the heart of naturopathy:

"guiding principle # 1: the healing power of nature, viz [sp., vis] medicatrix naturae: the body has the inherent ability to establish, maintain, and restore health. The healing process is ordered and intelligent; nature heals through the response of the life force [...] guiding principle #3: the process of healing includes the generation of symptoms which are, in fact, an expression of the life force attempting to heal itself";

Note: UB's claim is that there is a 'purposeful life spirit' bioagency that is scientific in fact. Here's an aggregation of naturopathy's essential vitalism;

03. supernaturalism is at the heart of naturopathy:

"Dean's welcome [...] are you interested in a career in a field of medicine that works to support the natural healing power of the body, mind, and spirit? In naturopathic medicine we call this vis medicatrix naturae (the healing power of nature), and it is our guiding philosophy";

Note: here's an aggregation of naturopathy's essential supernaturalism;

04. meanwhile, science PROFOUNDLY rejects and does not support vitalism and does not support supernaturalism;

Note: as Stephen Novella, MD recently wrote,

"it is a menace to the public when governments license nonsense. It is a betrayal of the public trust, it diminishes all professionalism, and it generally propagates confusion in an area where licensure is meant to provide clarity. One egregious example is naturopathy [...] naturopaths are health care pseudoscientists. Essentially, they are what happens when medicine is completely disconnected from science, evidence, and even common sense";

what to take away from all this:

UB absurdly labels what is profoundly nonscientific as scientific, from the confidence-building position of a "University" claiming a 'professions-level science curriculum' -- this is flim-flam; and what's even worse, UB claims that this confidence game complies with the ethical standards of the professions!

BTW, here's the definition of a "confidence game":

"the elements of the crime of the confidence game are (1) an intentional false representation to the victim as to some past or present fact . . . (2) knowing it to be false . . . (3) with the intent that the victim rely on the representation . . . (4) the representation being made to obtain the victim's confidence. . . And thereafter his money and property" [from "Law Dictionary" (ISBN 0764119966, 2003)].

M.T. Murray (ND Bastyr 1985) on Science & HPN - 'If We're Going to Be Exact...' (1996; ISBN 0761504109):

a short exploration of the "healing power of nature" science-ejected, coded vitalistic premise of naturopathy -- as opaquely expressed by Murray in 1996 -- of course, absurdly claimed to be firmly scientifically established and to have growing scientific support:

001. in the book "Encyclopedia of Nutritional Supplements" (1996; ISBN 0761504109), Michael T. Murray (ND Bastyr 1985) writes about science and the "healing power of nature:"

001.a. "science is paving the way for the medicine of the future - a medicine that recognizes the healing power of nature [HPN is naturopathy's fundamental premise; see 001.b.]. What exactly is science? [...] the term science refers to 'possession of knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding.' Scientific knowledge is based upon the scientific method, meaning that the understanding is based on the collection of data through observation and experiment [...] we use science to explain the nature of the human body and the environment. Breakthrough developments in many areas of science are occurring at an incredible pace, particularly in areas of medicine. [Historically,] what was once considered scientific medicine is often discarded when a deeper understanding is achieved. For example, in the 1800s scientific medicine involved bloodletting and the administration of very toxic substances [{this is not a bad definition of science} p.005]."

Note: the claim is that science is increasingly supporting naturopathy's "healing power of nature."

001.b. "[naturopathy is based upon] five time-tested principles [...first, foremost] the healing power of nature. The body has considerable power to heal itself. It is the role of the physician or healer to facilitate and enhance this process [p.006]."

Alert, since we're being "exact:" has the HPN been "exactly" / transparently defined here? My expertise tells me NO, NOT AT ALL -- because I know, exactly, what the healing power of nature contextually actually means for naturopathy -- it is the article of faith / belief known as vitalism, a concept profoundly science-ejected and lacking a shred of evidence to support its existence. It is USUAL for NDs / NMDs not to communicate this actuality. So the claim, that science is increasingly supporting naturopathy's "healing power of nature," plainly, is deceptive naturopathic bullshit, when things are looked at "exactly" -- transparently, historically.

{If you have any doubt about naturopathy's essential science-ejected vitalistic belief premise, Bastyr University states here, in a 2004 web page with a title containing the label "science," of course, per "Ayurveda: [is] The Science of Life:" "Christy Lee-Engel, ND [is] assistant dean of the university’s naturopathic medicine department [...and who said] 'underlying naturopathic and ayurvedic medicines is a faith in the healing power of nature [...] as you find with traditional Chinese medicine [qi], they emphasize living a healthy lifestyle by creating conditions in which the vital life force can do what it’s designed to do' [...] ayurveda was designed to maintain and establish the balance of life forces.” And, of course, Bastyr calls all this "science-based natural medicine" [ISYN!]}.

002. yet, Dr. Murray tells us:

002.a. "most natural healing therapies are based upon scientific investigation [!!!...] this increased understanding is a result of more strict scientific investigation [!!!...] the scientific investigation has not only validated the natural approach but [!!! etc....] we are seeing evidence of an increased acceptance of these [naturopathic] principles [e.g. vitalism!!!] and the practice of natural medicine, an acceptance that is a direct result of increased scientific investigation [!!!]. Scientists are validating the time-tested principles of naturopathic [p.006] medicine [!!!] and other natural therapies. This validation of natural medicine is not entirely surprising [!!!]. After all, if these principles and techniques are based upon truth, they should stand up to strict scientific scrutiny [p.007]."

Note: so, naturopathy labels the PROFOUNDLY science ejected, 'increasingly firmly science-based.' Their central concept and claim -- vitalism -- fell apart due to the march of science -- "a deeper understanding" was achieved -- yet, vitalism is falsely labeled 'firmly scientific' -- in this day and age. Meanwhile, naturopathy's 4th principle, per this book, is "the physician is a teacher. A physician should be foremost a teacher, educating [and] empowering" [p.006].

Let's correct that, to reflect what actually occurs: 'miseducating, deceiving' -- 'the physician is just plain wrong.'

for Dr. Murray's biography, click here, where you can be told: "he is a graduate, faculty member, and serves on the Board of Trustees of Bastyr University in Seattle, Washington."

Naturopathy's Essential Vitalism & Spiritism - In Their Own Words (2001; SCNM's Kim, Poorman, Mittman) per ISSN 1533-2101:

so, here we have -- published in a CAM journal, ISSN 1533-2101, currently edited by Susan A. Gaylord, PhD -- naturopathy's luminaries stating their vitalistic, spiritistic, teleological science-ejected obligation / premise that is 'the essentially naturopathic' {falsely labeled as scientific}:

01. in "Naturopathic Medical Education: Where Conventional, Complementary, and Alternative Medicine Meet" {here's the abstract; Complementary Health Practice Review, vol. 7, no. 2, 99-109 (2001)}, authors Kim (ND ?), Mittman (ND NCNM, DHANP AANP), and Poorman (PhD ?) -- all, at the time at least, of AANP-FNPLA-AANMC's Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine and Health Sciences -- state:

01.a. naturopathy's essential vitalism:

"[naturopathy is] based on a philosophy which acknowledges and encourages patients to actively participate in their health care [...] using a holistic approach [...our] principles of naturopathic medicine [...are] emphasized through a naturopathic physician's training [...and are] the foundation of this distinct health care practice [p.101...#1] first do no harm [...] illness is a purposeful [teleological!] process [...] the process of healing includes the generation of symptoms that are, in fact, expressions of the life force [...] the physician's actions can support or antagonize the actions of [this] vis medicatrix naturae, the healing power of nature [...] naturopathic physician's respect and and work with the vis medicatrix naturae in diagnosis, treatment, and counseling [...the] self-healing process [...#2] the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae) [...] the healing process is ordered and intelligent [teleological]; nature heals through the response of the life force [...] naturopathic medicine recognizes this healing process [...] the naturopathic physician's role is to facilitate and augment this process [p.102...] the philosophy and principles of naturopathic medicine, introduced in the first week of school, are embedded and interwoven throughout the entire fabric of the program [p.108]";

01.b. naturopathy's essential spiritism-supernaturalism:

"causes may occur on many levels including [...the] spiritual [p.102...] health and disease are conditions of the whole organism [...including the] spiritual [...] since total health also includes spiritual health, naturopathic physician's encourage individuals to pursue their personal spiritual development [...] the physician must also make a commitment to his/her personal and spiritual development [p.103]";

01.c. naturopathy's false overarching 'science claim':

"graduates take national board examinations in both basic and clinical sciences to become licensed as general practice naturopathic doctors [p.100...] naturopathic medicine is a [...] science [...] as primary care practitioners, naturopathic physicians [...] as in other medical schools, [have] a solid foundation [...in] conventional medical sciences [p.101...] the degree of doctor of naturopathic medicine requires four years of graduate level study in the medical sciences at Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine and Health Sciences [p.104]";

02. meanwhile, upon the preponderance: science does not support vitalism; science does not support supernaturalism; science does not support teleology.

what to take away from all this: they are science-illiterate, and deceptive. And, labeling something what it PROFOUNDLY isn't -- is absurd.

1010 WINS On Naturopathy - Science-Illiterate Journalism:

here we have the very false claim that 'the naturopathic is firmly scientific:'

01. Walter Geis reports for 1010 WINS {2008-08-11}, in "Naturopathic Cancer Care: Not as Crazy as it Sounds":

"naturopathic doctors [...] treat the body naturally and let it use its own healing powers [{this is a code}...] the science has been around since the late 1800s."

Note: we have, clearly stated, naturopathy's coded treatment context of 'the body's own healing powers,' and the claim that 'the naturopathic' is well-established "science."

02. we are referred to Dr. Prego's website, where he explains:

02.a. in "Long Island Naturopathic":

"I work with the philosophy of the healing power of nature [HPN, or as the article states, 'healing powers']."

Note: naturopathy 's overall treatment context is HPN. This is naturopathy's essential premise.

03. some analysis:

03.a. what is the HPN premise, specifically, to naturopathy?

HPN, or as the article states, 'the body's own healing powers,' is, specifically, naturopathy's defining belief in a 'purposeful life spirit' bioagency figmentation.

Note: this figment / article of faith is most-often coded {a form of abuse} -- Prego and WINS are good examples of this -- but, the public should know the truth, so as not to be snookered, and instead be able to make decisions which are well-informed.

03.b what is the scientific status of such vitalism-supernaturalism?

vitalism has been patently science-ejected for at least several decades, while supernaturalisms have not been scientifically supportable for a few hundred years. Naturopathy's 'bait and switch' is about falsely labeling science-ejected and science-unsupported beliefs scientific, and also to label what is supernatural in status as natural. To state, regarding the essentially naturopathic view [which is a vitalism-supernaturalism obligated belief system], that "the science has been around since the late 1800s," is SIMPLY ridiculous -- it is an example of profound science-illiteracy.

what to take away from this:

this article's claim that science supports what is essentially naturopathic -- that science supports naturopathy's vitalistic and supernatural figmentous context -- is PATENTLY FALSE. What kind of journalism is this? Journalism that hasn't checked its facts; journalism that is science-illiterate. When sectarian imaginary conceptions such as naturopathy's 'vitalistic-teleological-supernatural nonscientific principles' are labeled firmly scientific, and then the word "cancer" is stated...that is QUITE CRAZY.

Uncoding Naturopathy's Essential Science-Ejected Vitalism Premise - NCANP, UBCNM:

here, I use my amazing powers of mundane rational thinking to decode naturopathy's central premise by employing the University of Bridgeport's Naturopathic College site [see 02. below] to show that the North Carolina Association of Naturopathic Physician's site is, as usual for naturopathy, not being contextually complete [to be polite; see 01. below] in representing naturopathy's central sectarian principle:

01. the North Carolina Association of Naturopathic Physicians [NCANP] states the "The Principles of Naturopathic Medicine":

"[#1, foremost and centrally, we believe in] the healing power of nature. Naturopathic medicine recognizes an inherit [sp., inherent] self-healing process in the person which is ordered and intelligent. Naturopathic physicians act to identify and remove obstacles to healing and recovery, and to facilitate and augment this inherent self-healing process";

Note: the terminology is "inherent self-healing process," and NCANP directs us in "Other Resources" to the University of Bridgeport College of Natural Medicine.

02. the University of Bridgeport states in "Six Guiding Principles: Guiding Principle # 1: The Healing Power of Nature":

"viz [sp., vis] medicatrix naturae: the body has the inherent ability to establish, maintain, and restore health. The healing process is ordered and intelligent [teleological]; nature heals through the response of the life force [vitalism]. The physician's role is to facilitate and augment this process";

Note: so, you are now 'in the know' about naturopathy's central principle -- a particular science-ejected belief.

Naturopathic Medicine: A "Career Choice" Obligated to A Belief System Centered Upon Vitalism (Snider; TLDP, 1992 & 2005):

here are two citations from a CAM journal [TLDP] regarding naturopathy's essential vitalism belief [a science-ejected concept, see 02. below], as expressed in articles that include [see 01.a. below] or are center around [see 01.b. below] a key architect of the current AANP iteration of naturopathy's belief system, Dr. Pamela Snider ND:

01. the Townsend Letter For Doctors and Patients states naturopathy's essential vitalism per:

01.a. "1991 AANP Convention - Into The Light," a report on the 1991 AANP Convention, {per Kane, E. (ND Bastyr 1992); Townsend Letter #105, April 1992, p.260-2}:

"[quoting Snider, P. (ND Bastyr 1982)] we believe in the vital force, which has inherent organization, in intelligent [teleological] and intelligible [...] we have vis medicatrix naturae. Our way is to research the mystery and beauty of the life force, in which we have faith. Our power and our responsibility is to bring the life force into the light."

01.b. "Naturopathic Physician on Her Career Choice: 'No Regrets'," an interview of Snider, {per Zablocki, E. (? ?); web published date 2005-05-01; archived here}:

"naturopathic medicine relies on the vital life force within human beings."

02. what science says:

02.a. the New York Academy of Sciences states in "The Autonomy of Biology" (click here):

"[per Ernst Mayr] biology could not be recognized as a science of the same rank as physics as long as most biologists accepted certain basic explanatory principles not supported by the laws of the physical sciences and eventually found to be invalid. The two major principles here involved are vitalism and a belief in cosmic teleology. As soon as it had been demonstrated that these two principles are invalid and, more broadly, that none of the phenomena of the living world is in conflict with the natural laws of the physicalists, there was no longer any reason for not recognizing biology as a legitimate autonomous science equivalent to physics."

SGU's Novella: "A Naturopath [BCNA's Swetlikoff] On Water," and UBCNM:

some 'right on the money' excerpted comments regarding naturopathy by Dr. Novella from the Skeptic's Guide to the Universe podcast blogpage, "The Rogues Gallery" [see 01. below]. Being quite familiar with the University of Bridgeport's naturopathy pseudoscience [I am one of the snookered!], I've provided an immediate example of UB naturopathic nonsensical 'scientific nonscience' [see 02. below], and some related -- rather coded -- material from Dr. Swetlikoff's own site [see 03. below], and the BCNA site [see 04. below]:

01. Novella, S. (MD ?) states in "A Naturopath On Water"{08-10-2008}:

"[truly] it is a menace to the public when governments license nonsense. It is a betrayal of the public trust, it diminishes all professionalism, and it generally propagates confusion in an area where licensure is meant to provide clarity. One egregious example is naturopathy [...] naturopaths are health care pseudoscientists [...] essentially, they are what happens when medicine is completely disconnected from science, evidence, and even common sense [...you get] pure pseudoscience - complete with superficial medical jargon but delightfully devoid of any evidence or scientific rationale [...e.g. Canada's] Lorne Swetlikoff [ND Bastyr 1988] is the current president of the College of Naturopathic Physicians of British Columbia [BCNA]. To a non-critical thinker the pseudoscience spewed by Swetlikoff and other naturopaths may sound compelling and 'sciencey.' But on close examination it is pure pseudoscience."

Note: one of the best definitions of pseudoscience I've ever come across is at Wikipedia:

"pseudoscience is defined as a body of knowledge, methodology, belief, or practice that is claimed to be scientific or made to appear scientific, but does not adhere to the scientific method, lacks supporting evidence or plausibility, or otherwise lacks scientific status."

02. UBCNM's irrationality / 'epistemic fraud:'

02.a. UB states that naturopathy is science;

visit this compilation.

02.b. UB states naturopathy's essential vitalism;

visit this compilation.

02.c. vitalism is HUGELY science-ejected;

visit this compilation.

Note: obviously, UB's label upon naturopathy as scientific is completely misleading.

03. what Dr. Swetlikoff says:

03.a. in "About Dr. Swetlikoff" we're told:

"naturopathic medicine [...is] science-based holistic health care."

03.b. in "About Naturopathic Medicine" we're told:

"naturopathic medicine is a distinct healing science and philosophy [...] the art and science of supporting the natural healing processes of the patient [...] the naturopathic physician will practice the art, science and spirit of the profession to the best of his/her ability and judgment following these principles of naturopathic medicine [...#1, the primary principle] vis medicatrix naturae (the healing power of nature). The naturopathic physician shall [must!] recognize, respect and promote the self-healing power of nature inherent in each individual human being [vitalism; for more such essential, mandatory naturopathic vitalism {so often, as here, coded}, click here]."

Note: the great irrationality of naturopathy can bee seen in these Swetlikoff examples -- placing the label science upon that which is preponderantly HUGELY nonscience [vitalism, supernaturalism & kind].

04. the British Columbia Naturopathic Association states in "The Nature of Naturopathic Medicine":

"[per Cassie, G. (MA ?), BCNA Executive Director] naturopathic medicine is science based natural medicine. The third major difference is the philosophy of naturopathic treatment [..with #1, the primary principle] vis medicatrix naturae [VMN]: the body has the inherent capacity to heal [...] embracing these tenets [like VMN], on a science-based platform, is at the heart of naturopathic medical care [...NDs have studied] all the basic sciences any general practitioner receives [...NDs have] 'a comprehensive foundation in the biological and biomedical sciences' [...and] 'the commission believes that the division between alternative and orthodox medicine is not of a scientific nature' [huh?!?!]."

Note: the coding, the coding!!! The vitalism that dare not speak its name. Visit the Federation of Naturopathic Physician Licensing Authorities to see that the expression VMN is truly, contextually, a representation of naturopathy's overarching vitalism figmentation.

Naturopathy's Oxymoronic 'Scientific Vitalism & Supernaturalism' - Lisanti, F. (ND NCNM):

this is one of my favorite, completely illogical / oxymoronic claims: North American naturopaths who label that which is profoundly science-ejected [see 01.a1., 01.a2. below], and absolutely without scientific support -- scientific [see 01.b. below]. Welcome to the land of 'an in fact scientific fact that is, in fact, science-ejected" aka naturopathy:

01. Lisanti, F. (ND NCNM) states:

01.a. in "Naturopathic Doctors":

01.a1. naturopathy's essential vitalism:

"in short, naturopathic doctors or NDs design treatments that work with your vital force [...] there are six principles of naturopathic medicine. [The primary one, our vitalism premise, is also called] the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae)."

Note: click here for a compilation of such 'essential naturopathic vitalism.'

01.a2. naturopathy's essential supernaturalism:

"a naturopathic doctor will direct treatment toward the root cause of illness be it physical, mental, emotional, or spiritual [...we evaluate] our patients' mental, physical, and spiritual wellnesses."

Note: click here for a compilation of such 'essential naturopathic supernaturalism.'

o1.b. naturopathy's overarching science labeling in "Naturopathic Medicine":

"naturopathic medicine is a [...] science [...] naturopathic medicine is distinguished by the principles upon which its practice is based. These principles [e.g.: our essential vitalism & supernaturalism] are continually re-examined in the light of scientific advances [...NDs are] comprehensively trained in the science of natural
health care."

Note: click here more examples of such 'naturopathy is science' self-labeling.

02. here's where it gets VERY interesting, and naturopathy's 'epistemic fraud' becomes quite clear:

02.a. vitalism is profoundly science-ejected.

02.b. supernaturalism is profoundly nonscientific / not supported by science.

03. so, do you trust the 'science expertise claims of naturopaths,' who place the label 'able to survive scientific scrutiny' upon what truly -- PROFOUNDLY -- cannot?

UK Homeopathy, AANP's NPLEX II, and the "Current of Science and Reason":

Andy Lewis points out the nonsense known as homeopathy. Meanwhile, NDs -- who must do mandatory homeopathy coursework, homeopathy patient contact quotas, and a national exam that includes homeopathy -- claim that such nonsense is a clinical science. Fascinating:

01. Andy Lewis of The Quackometer points out in his excellent "Desperate Remedies"post {2008-08-03}:

"homeopathy on the NHS has nearly vanished [...it is] the last vestigial remnants of nineteenth century quackery [... it's a] fabulously constructed fantasy world [...] the Faculty of Homeopaths [...they] are swimming against the current of science and reason [...homeopathy is] an entirely placebo based therapy [...] that is what all the science and evidence says homeopathy is [...homeopathy's disappearance] is the natural result of an increasing awareness of the need to adopt evidence based practices."

02. meanwhile, in North America:

02.a. the Naturopathic Physicians Licensing Examinations [NPLEX], by way of Bastyr University, states that homeopathy is a clinical science:

"NPLEX Part II - Clinical Science Examinations: Blueprints & Preparation Guide [...] the NPLEX Board designed this guide to give general information to anyone taking the NPLEX Part II – Clinical Science Examinations [...including] homeopathy."

02.b. but, this should not be surprising since AANP-FNPLA-NPLEX naturopathy ignores the parameters whereby actual science is conducted, claiming instead -- merely by fiat, against quite a preponderance of historic precedent -- that the following either nonscientific or science-ejected concepts / sectic premises are in fact science / science-based / scientific:

vitalism, supernaturalism, autoentheism & kind.

03. obviously, the "current of science and reason" has:

profoundly ejected vitalism and ejected supernaturalism from the realm of science.

UB-AANP, DI Parallels: Coding the Supernatural, Supernaturalizing Science:

Some parallels come to mind as regards groups that a) typically are not transparent when it comes to communicating what they're main context is; b) seek to inject into science a whole bunch of belief-stuff that, by definition, lacks an evidence basis. The groups I'm thinking about are the DI and the UBCNM-AANP consortia:

01. in the Center For Inquiry's position paper "Understanding the Intelligent Design Creationist Movement, Its True Nature and Goals"(2007), author Barbara Forrest (PhD{philosophy} Tulane), "a key expert witness for the plaintiffs in the 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial" [according to Wikipedia], states:

01.a. regarding the Discovery Institute's coding of the supernatural, religious, and theistic:

"intelligent design theory' [...is] essentially [a] code for the religious belief in a supernatural creator [p.001]."

Note: the DI has deliberately coded / camouflaged specific beliefs / articles of faith -- the sectic supernatural, the sectic theistic -- so as not to reveal an essential 'faith' context.

01.b. regarding the DI's supernaturalizing of science [and how wrong that is]:

"science requires testable hypotheses [...while] conjectures about the actions of 'designers' or other supernatural agents are not testable [...] the methodology of science, sometimes called 'methodological naturalism,' limits scientists to the search for natural explanations of natural phenomena. Despite the historical fact that, several centuries ago, scientists abandoned as unworkable the attempt to explain natural phenomena by appeals to the supernatural, ID proponents argue, like earlier creationists, that modern science’s exclusion of the supernatural as a scientific explanation is arbitrary [...the DI employs] an unworkable, pre-modern definition of science that requires appeals to the supernatural [p.005]."

Note: the DI has attempted to devolve science to permit supernaturalism / to supernaturalize science. This is obviously anachronistic; it is an 'any old explanation will do' approach to knowledge that refuses to recognize the 'naturalistic methodology and context' of modern science, and ignores the testability requirements expected of modern scientific hypotheses.

02. similar University of Bridgeport & AANP coding of the supernatural-vitalistic, religious, autoentheistic:

02.a. naturopathy's central premise is coded at UB in their 2006-2008 catalog [and wrongly claimed as science / able to survive scientific scrutiny]:

"[UB's] Division of Health Sciences [...includes] naturopathic medicine [p.055...our] AANP principles and practice [...these] principles are continually reexamined in the light of scientific advances [...#1, the primary principle] the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae) [HPN-VMN]: naturopathic medicine recognizes an inherent self-healing process in the person which is ordered and intelligent. Naturopathic physicians act to identify and remove obstacles to healing and recovery, and to facilitate and augment this inherent self-healing process [p.071]."

Note: science as an overarching label is placed upon naturopathy and its principles, and the central / essential premise is described in terms which are naturalistic.

02.b. compare UB's coded catalog language describing naturopathy's central premise to the AANP's Oregon Board of Naturopathic Examiners' language (see this 2008-01-06 archived page) [again, wrongly claimed as able to surivive scientific scrutiny]:

"[the AANP] principles are based on the objective observation of the nature of health and disease, and are continually reexamined in light of scientific analysis. It is these [AANP] principles that distinguish the profession from other medical approaches: [#1, the primary principle] the healing power of nature. Vis medicatrix naturae. The body has the inherent ability to establish, maintain, and restore health. The healing process is ordered and intelligent; nature heals through the response of the life force [...] methods of treatments are chosen to work with the patient’s vital force, respecting the intelligence of the natural healing process [...] illness is a purposeful process of the organism. The process of healing includes the generation of symptoms, which are, in fact, an expression of the life force attempting to heal itself."

Note: again, science as a label is placed upon naturopathy, but herein is explicit language that the HPN is the vitalistic conception of a "life force" bioagency figmentation ['purposeful life spirit']. UB's catalog, comparatively, hasn't provided such partial transparency, and as such, is coded.

03. the AANP's vitalistic "self-healing process" aka HPN-VMN aka "life force" aka "vital force" concepts are themselves codings for even deeper / more explicit supernatural conceptions -- spiritism and autoentheism. To fully appreciate the supernatural context of the AANP's "healing power of nature," see:

03.a. the AANP's HSNP's document "What is Naturopathic Medicine" (see this 2006-10-22 archived page) :

"our practice us guided by the following principles: [#1, the primary principle] use the healing power of nature. The body has the ability to maintain and restore health. Healing occurs as a result of the revival of our 'vital force' - qi, prana, spirit."

Note: specifically, healing power of nature=vital force=qi=prana=spirit.

03.b. the AANP's Pizzorno, J.E. (ND NCNM 1975)'s book "Total Wellness" (ISBN 076151094X;1997), the AANP's Physician of the Year 2002:

"the healing power of nature (vis medicatrix naturae). Our bodies have a tremendous ability to heal [...] natural healers refer to this inherent drive as 'the healing power of nature' or the vis medicatrix naturae [p.003...there are] seven underlying, health-sustaining systems of our body must function effectively to ensure our well-being, prevent disease, and allow a full life [...including the] life-force (or spirit) [p.024...] the psychosocial/spiritual/life-force [p.317...] the life-force within each of us, which naturopathic physicians call the vis medicatrix naturae [...] it is increased awareness of and access to this teleological force, the healer within, that is the essence of each of us [p.333...for] life force. See spiritual system [p.410]."

Note: Pizzorno and the institution he founded, Bastyr University, call this vitalistic, figment based, 'supernatural / spiritistic healing' context "science based natural medicine."

03.c. and as regards naturopathy's 'primary principle' and the theistic: while at UB as an ND student, the HPN-VMN was taught to me by first AANP President & UBCNM founding dean Sensenig as the sectarian "fixed principle" of "god power within" oneself. I have termed this 'animatistic autoentheism,' the belief that 'god / the divine as a life force' is within oneself. All the while, the University claims to be nonsectarian.

04. what to take away from this little exercise:

04.a. just as the Discovery Institute codes nonscientific and specifically religious / supernatural concepts in misleading naturalistic language, and insists that science must contain the supernatural & theistic, so does naturopathy. Likewise, in the sense of sectic articles of faith: naturopathy's vitalism has been science-ejected for several decades, and naturopathy's supernaturalism (the spiritistic, their autoentheistic theism type) has been science-ejected for at least a few centuries.

04.b. both the DI and AANP naturopathy merely [falsely] decree the scientific status of concepts ['science by fiat']; they don't do actual science and don't abide by the boundaries of 'the scientific.'