here, I cite from the 2007 film "Kansas vs. Darwin" [see 001., below]; then I draw parallels to naturopathy [see 002., below]; particularly equating the creationists' god-of-the-gaps argument with vitalists' vital-force-of-the-gaps one [see 003., below]; then, we visit some Kansas naturopathy [see 004., below]:
"[00.17.56 title] adoption of the minority report would insert a new definition of science into the teaching standards [...Kansas Citizens for Science member Harry McDonald, retired high school biology teacher] 'the problem is not what they say. The problem is what they're leaving out, and the hay they're going to make as a result of leaving it out. And they're specifically leaving out this reference that science deals with only natural explanations. And they're specifically leaving it out because then that opens up the supernatural' [by unlimiting science...Pedro L. Irigonegaray, trial attorney, council for Science Standards Majority] 'that's absolutely illogical. How can one understand whether or not there is a controversy in science if one doesn't understand at least what the scientific process is? [...] intelligent design requires a designer [...] supernatural [...] ultimately it is god [...] their perspective of god' [claimed as universally true, of course...KCS Jack Krebs] 'they're also attacking this bigger idea that in fact the things that we don't know about the past can be filled in with supernatural explanations' [00.26.45, the 'god-of-the-gaps' argument...00.28.59] the National Academy of Sciences in Washington DC is considered to be the chief scientific authority in the United States and most of the world [...] Bruce Alberts, PhD. President, National Academy of Sciences [...science] 'doesn't involve supernaturalism [...] the reason why science is successful and has transformed our societies and our lives, and improved our health, is we insist as we explore the world there must be an natural explanation for this [...it's not about inserting] god [...essentially giving up looking because] then of course you'll never find out the answers because you only work hard to find out an answer when you believe there is one, that there is a natural explanation. Always in the past, no matter how hard the question, we've found natural explanations. We need to keep that the centerpiece of science' [...] [00.31.40 Burt Humburg] 'you don't promote a scientific theory by appealing to state boards of education. If their was any validity to intelligent design, they would be publishing their work [science peer-review], they would be convincing people just by sheer weight of the utility of their ideas' [adoption]."
Note: so, there's the redefinition of science, opening up science to supernaturalism while naturalism is an essence of science. There's the claim of science-expertise without scientific expertise, there's imposition of sectarian belief, god-of-the-gap, and science-by-decree not by its usual processes. Boy, a lot of this resonates with me in relation to naturopathy.
002. and so:
002.a. naturopathy claims that the supernatural is science, therein redefining science:
yet, it's called "natural". So, there is an ultimately supernatural basis for the natural, according the lead expert on so-called "science-based natural medicine", Joe Pizzorno (ND NCNM), who states that naturopath's centerpiece idea is "spirit" [supernatural].
002.b. there's the claim of science-expertise all-the-while:
Pizzorno is a microcosm of that.
002.c. there's the overall sectarian belief set claiming objective scientific fact status:
OBNM is a good example.
003. naturopathy's vital-force-of-the-gaps, via MD Novella in the Teaching Company lecture "Myths about Acupuncture’s Past and Benefits: Lecture 17" from the 2010 course "Medical Myths, Lies, and Half-Truths What We Think We Know May Be Hurting Us" [which I highly recommend]:
"[00.02.17] the Chinese have a concept for life energy which is called chi [...] life energy [...] this notion of a life energy is not unique to China or to Eastern cultures. In Sanskrit, there is mention of a life energy called prana. The Greeks had a notion of life energy that they called pneuma [...] the Romans had spiritus. [...] life energy is an interesting concept. It’s often referred to as vitalism or the vitalistic force, the force that makes living things different from nonliving things [...] this notion of vitalism was eliminated from the science of biology about 150 years ago. Essentially, vitalistic explanations were used to explain aspects of biology that we didn’t currently understand. Whatever process that we didn’t know how it happened we invoked vitalism as the explanation. But eventually it simply became unnecessary -- once we had anatomy, physiology, and biochemistry enough to explain the functions of life. Life energy simply became superfluous. It always was little more than a placeholder. There was no evidence for life energy; it simply was the default explanation that was used until biological sciences advanced sufficiently [00.04.12]".
Note: replace the science-exterior idea of god with naturopathy's science-exterior vital force, and you have an as-sectarian figmentation falsely posing science, as in the film - the god-of-the-gaps becomes in naturopathy a vital-force-of-the-gaps. How naturopathy gets away with falsely labeling what is more than 100-years-ago science-ejected as science and trading on that circumstance both in terms of the education apparatus and clinically, well, that's a miracle.
004. Kansas naturopathy:
004.a. the Kansas State Board of Healing Arts states in "Kansas Statutes Annotated and Kansas Administrative Regulations Relating to the Practice of Naturopathy Revised January 2011":
"[the ND / NMD must have] passed an examination approved by the board covering appropriate naturopathic subjects including basic and clinical sciences [..] (1) basic sciences, including the following:(A) anatomy; (B) biochemistry; (C) microbiology; (D) pathology; and (E) physiology; and (2) clinical sciences, including the following: (A) emergency medicine and public health; (B) laboratory diagnosis and diagnostic imaging; (C) botanical medicine; (D) clinical nutrition; (E) physical and clinical diagnosis; (F) physical medicine; (G) psychology; (H) counseling; (I) ethics; and (J) homeopathy."
Note: the science claims are LARGE -- pannaturopathic -- and just the claim of science upon homeopathy alone is indicative of the nonscience that this claimed science status is.
004.b. I've posted previously:
in "State of Kansas BHA-NAC Members' Naturopathic Absurdity: Homeopathy As 'Science'", if you want more detail.
004.c. but, for some immediate sectarian vitalism-supernaturalism, see "About Our Clinic" by NDs Khosh and Beneda which states:
"our philosophy is based on the six principles of naturopathic medicine: [#1] vis medicatrix naturae (the healing power of nature) [...] the body has more innate healing power than all medicine in history. We call this power the life force, and foremost, we cultivate its restorative processes. [#2] Tolle causam (identify and treat the cause): symptoms are an expression of the life force [...] we strive to promote balance, creativity, optimal health and wellness in the patient’s life on the physical, emotional, mental and spiritual realms [...] good health is the harmonious interrelation of physical, emotional, spiritual, environmental, social, and genetic factors."
Note: so, now the natural includes the supernatural science-exterior and vitalistic science-exterior. All, of course, claimed by the State of Kansas board as science. Fascinating, science by decree but false. Yes, "the problem is what they're leaving out" and it is quite "illogical": actual science, and information concerning where naturopathy lies; the fact that someing cannot be within what excludes it.